skills/create-prompt/SKILL.md
Expert prompt engineering for Claude, GPT, and LLMs. ALWAYS use when the user says "write a prompt", "create a prompt", "optimize this prompt", "improve my prompt", "system prompt", "few-shot", "écrire un prompt", "améliorer mon prompt", or mentions prompt engineering. Covers clarity, structure, examples, reasoning patterns, and advanced techniques from Anthropic/OpenAI research.
npx skillsauth add devattom/.claude create-promptInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Every prompt created should be clear, specific, and optimized for the target model. </objective>
<quick_start> <workflow>
<core_structure> Every effective prompt has:
<context>
Background information the model needs
</context>
<task>
Clear, specific instruction of what to do
</task>
<requirements>
- Specific constraints
- Output format
- Edge cases to handle
</requirements>
<examples>
Input/output pairs demonstrating expected behavior
</examples>
<success_criteria>
How to know the task was completed correctly
</success_criteria>
</core_structure> </quick_start>
<core_techniques> <technique name="be_clear_and_direct"> Priority: Always apply first
See: references/clarity-principles.md </technique>
<technique name="use_xml_tags"> **When**: Claude prompts, complex structure neededClaude was trained with XML tags. Use them for:
<context>, <task>, <output><document>, <schema>, <example>See: references/xml-structure.md </technique>
<technique name="few_shot_examples"> **When**: Output format matters, pattern recognition easier than rulesProvide 2-4 input/output pairs:
<examples>
<example number="1">
<input>User clicked signup button</input>
<output>track('signup_initiated', { source: 'homepage' })</output>
</example>
</examples>
See: references/few-shot-patterns.md </technique>
<technique name="chain_of_thought"> **When**: Complex reasoning, math, multi-step analysisAdd explicit reasoning instructions:
<thinking> tags for Claude's extended thinkingSee: references/reasoning-techniques.md </technique>
<technique name="system_prompts"> **When**: Setting persistent behavior, role, constraintsSystem prompts set the foundation:
See: references/system-prompt-patterns.md </technique>
<technique name="prefilling"> **When**: Enforcing specific output format (Claude-specific)Start Claude's response to guide format:
Assistant: {"result":
Forces JSON output without preamble. </technique>
<technique name="context_management"> **When**: Long-running tasks, multi-session work, large context usageFor Claude 4.5 with context awareness:
See: references/context-management.md </technique> </core_techniques>
<prompt_creation_workflow> <step_0> Gather requirements using AskUserQuestion:
What is the prompt's purpose?
What model will use this prompt?
What complexity level?
Output format requirements?
<step_1> Draft the prompt using this template:
<context>
[Background the model needs to understand the task]
</context>
<objective>
[Clear statement of what to accomplish]
</objective>
<instructions>
[Step-by-step process, numbered if sequential]
</instructions>
<constraints>
[Rules, limitations, things to avoid]
</constraints>
<output_format>
[Exact structure of expected output]
</output_format>
<examples>
[2-4 input/output pairs if format matters]
</examples>
<success_criteria>
[How to verify the task was done correctly]
</success_criteria>
</step_1>
<step_2> Apply relevant techniques based on complexity:
<step_3> Review checklist:
<anti_patterns> <pitfall name="vague_instructions"> ❌ "Help with the data" ✅ "Extract email addresses from the CSV, remove duplicates, output as JSON array" </pitfall>
<pitfall name="negative_prompting"> ❌ "Don't use technical jargon" ✅ "Write in plain language suitable for a non-technical audience" </pitfall> <pitfall name="no_examples"> ❌ Describing format in words only ✅ Showing 2-3 concrete input/output examples </pitfall> <pitfall name="missing_edge_cases"> ❌ "Process the file" ✅ "Process the file. If empty, return []. If malformed, return error with line number." </pitfall>See: references/anti-patterns.md </anti_patterns>
<reference_guides> Core principles:
Techniques:
Best practices by vendor:
Quality:
<success_criteria> A well-crafted prompt has:
development
Use when you want to audit a project wiki for quality issues — stale version claims, contradictions between pages, orphan pages, broken wiki links, missing cross-references, or misalignment between wiki content and the actual codebase state.
development
Systematic error debugging with analysis, solution discovery, and verification
development
Structured adversarial debate between AI councillors using Agent Teams to evaluate ideas, plans, or decisions. ALWAYS use when the user says "council", "debate this", "evaluate this idea", "challenge my plan", "stress-test", "devil's advocate", "multiple perspectives", "évaluer cette idée", "débattre", "challenger mon plan", "tester cette décision", or when the user wants rigorous multi-perspective analysis of a proposal, architecture decision, or strategic choice. Each councillor (visionary, critic, pragmatist, innovator, ethicist, domain expert) represents a distinct perspective and they challenge each other through cross-examination and peer exchange, producing a nuanced verdict (PROCEED / PROCEED WITH CONDITIONS / RECONSIDER / DO NOT PROCEED). Do NOT use for divergent brainstorming or idea generation — use workflow-brainstorm instead.
testing
Automated CI/CD pipeline fixer - watches CI, fixes errors locally, commits, and loops until green. Use when CI is failing and you want to automatically fix and verify changes.