prompt-improver
Compare original and translation side by side
🇺🇸
Original
English🇨🇳
Translation
ChinesePrompt Improver
Prompt 优化器
Overview
概述
A skill that analyzes and improves prompts based on general LLM/agent best practices. It focuses on verifiability, clear scope, explicit constraints, and context economy so the agent can execute with minimal back-and-forth.
If you are running in Claude Code, also read and apply the additional Claude-specific techniques.
If you are running in Codex CLI, also read and apply the additional Codex-specific techniques.
references/claude.mdreferences/codex.mdWhen the input is a document that instructs an agent (e.g., plan files, AGENTS.md, system instruction docs), treat the document as the improvement target; identify issues and propose concrete improvements, and include a revised draft when helpful.
一款基于通用LLM/Agent最佳实践来分析和优化提示词的Skill。它聚焦于可验证性、明确范围、显式约束以及上下文精简,让Agent能够以最少的交互次数完成任务。
如果您在Claude Code环境中运行,请同时阅读并应用针对Claude的额外优化技巧。
如果您在Codex CLI环境中运行,请同时阅读并应用针对Codex的额外优化技巧。
references/claude.mdreferences/codex.md当输入内容是指导Agent的文档时(例如计划文件、AGENTS.md、系统指令文档),请将该文档作为优化目标;识别其中的问题并提出具体改进方案,必要时可提供修订后的草稿。
Workflow
工作流程
Step 0: Classify Task and Complexity
步骤0:任务分类与复杂度评估
Classify the task and decide whether an explicit exploration/planning phase should be recommended:
- Task type: bugfix, feature, refactor, research, UI/visual, docs, ops
- Complexity: single-file/small change vs multi-file/uncertain impact
- Risk: data safety, security, compatibility, performance
- Input type: prompt vs agent-instruction document (plan files, AGENTS.md, system instruction docs)
If the task is complex or ambiguous, the improved prompt should explicitly request an exploration/planning phase before implementation.
对任务进行分类,并决定是否建议开启显式的探索/规划阶段:
- 任务类型:bug修复、功能开发、重构、研究、UI/视觉设计、文档编写、运维
- 复杂度:单文件/小型变更 vs 多文件/影响不确定的变更
- 风险:数据安全、安全性、兼容性、性能
- 输入类型:提示词 vs Agent指令文档(计划文件、AGENTS.md、系统指令文档)
如果任务复杂或模糊,优化后的提示词应明确要求在实施前先进行探索/规划阶段。
Step 1: Analyze the Prompt
步骤1:分析提示词
Analyze the user-provided prompt from the following perspectives:
- Verifiability: Does it include means for Claude to verify its own work?
- Specificity: Are files, scenarios, and constraints clearly specified?
- Context: Is necessary background information provided?
- Scope: Is the task scope appropriately defined?
- Expected Outcome: Are success criteria clear?
- Constraints: Are language/runtime versions, dependencies, security, or compatibility requirements specified?
- Context Economy: Is the prompt concise and focused, without unnecessary information?
- Execution Preference: Is it clear whether the model should implement, propose, or just analyze?
从以下角度分析用户提供的提示词:
- 可验证性:是否包含让Claude验证自身工作成果的方法?
- 明确性:文件、场景和约束是否有清晰的说明?
- 上下文:是否提供了必要的背景信息?
- 范围:任务范围是否定义得当?
- 预期结果:成功标准是否明确?
- 约束条件:是否指定了语言/运行时版本、依赖项、安全或兼容性要求?
- 上下文精简:提示词是否简洁聚焦,没有冗余信息?
- 执行偏好:是否明确模型应该执行实现、提出方案还是仅进行分析?
Step 2: Identify Issues
步骤2:识别问题
Check for the following anti-patterns:
| Anti-pattern | Description |
|---|---|
| Vague instructions | Lacks specificity like "make it better" or "improve it" |
| No verification method | Missing tests, screenshots, or expected output |
| No verification commands | Missing how to run tests or check outputs |
| Overly broad scope | Asking for too many things at once |
| Insufficient context | Missing file paths, error messages, or references to existing patterns |
| Symptom-only description | Not requesting investigation of root cause |
| Missing constraints | No environment, dependency, or compatibility requirements |
| No exploration/planning cue | Complex tasks not asking for exploration/planning first |
| Context bloat | Unnecessary details that increase token usage |
| Ambiguous deliverable | Unclear whether to plan, implement, or only analyze |
| Unclear response format | Missing brevity/structure expectations |
检查是否存在以下反模式:
| 反模式 | 描述 |
|---|---|
| 模糊指令 | 缺乏具体性,例如“让它更好”或“优化它” |
| 无验证方法 | 缺少测试用例、截图或预期输出 |
| 无验证命令 | 缺少如何运行测试或检查输出的说明 |
| 范围过于宽泛 | 一次要求完成过多任务 |
| 上下文不足 | 缺少文件路径、错误信息或对现有模式的引用 |
| 仅描述症状 | 未要求调查根本原因 |
| 缺少约束条件 | 未指定环境、依赖项或兼容性要求 |
| 无探索/规划提示 | 复杂任务未要求先进行探索/规划 |
| 上下文冗余 | 包含不必要的细节,增加Token使用量 |
| 交付物模糊 | 不清楚是要规划、实现还是仅进行分析 |
| 响应格式不明确 | 缺少对简洁性/结构的预期 |
Step 3: Create Improved Prompt
步骤3:生成优化后的提示词
Apply best practices to create an improved version:
应用最佳实践生成优化版本:
Add Verifiability
添加可验证性
Before: "implement a function that validates email addresses"
After: "write a validateEmail function. test cases: user@example.com is true, invalid is false, user@.com is false. run the tests after implementing"Before: "implement a function that validates email addresses"
After: "write a validateEmail function. test cases: user@example.com is true, invalid is false, user@.com is false. run the tests after implementing"Add Specific Context
添加具体上下文
Before: "fix the login bug"
After: "users report that login fails after session timeout. check the auth flow in src/auth/, especially token refresh. write a failing test that reproduces the issue, then fix it"Before: "fix the login bug"
After: "users report that login fails after session timeout. check the auth flow in src/auth/, especially token refresh. write a failing test that reproduces the issue, then fix it"Add Reference to Existing Patterns
添加对现有模式的引用
Before: "add a calendar widget"
After: "look at how existing widgets are implemented on the home page to understand the patterns. HotDogWidget.php is a good example. follow the pattern to implement a new calendar widget with month selection and pagination"Before: "add a calendar widget"
After: "look at how existing widgets are implemented on the home page to understand the patterns. HotDogWidget.php is a good example. follow the pattern to implement a new calendar widget with month selection and pagination"Add Context Economy
实现上下文精简
Before: "here is a long unrelated history ... fix the dropdown"
After: "fix the dropdown in src/ui/Dropdown.tsx. issue: keyboard navigation skips items. keep the prompt focused; omit unrelated history"Before: "here is a long unrelated history ... fix the dropdown"
After: "fix the dropdown in src/ui/Dropdown.tsx. issue: keyboard navigation skips items. keep the prompt focused; omit unrelated history"Add Rich Context Inputs
添加丰富上下文输入
Before: "build fails"
After: "build fails with this error: [paste error]. run the smallest relevant test command. if needed, read the build script and package config"Before: "build fails"
After: "build fails with this error: [paste error]. run the smallest relevant test command. if needed, read the build script and package config"Add Explicit Exploration/Planning When Needed
必要时添加显式探索/规划要求
Before: "refactor auth to support OAuth"
After: "first explore src/auth and summarize current flow, then propose a plan. after approval, implement with tests"When information is missing, include explicit questions inside the improved prompt and do not assume defaults.
Before: "refactor auth to support OAuth"
After: "first explore src/auth and summarize current flow, then propose a plan. after approval, implement with tests"当信息缺失时,在优化后的提示词中加入明确的问题,不要假设默认值。
Example: Bugfix
示例:Bug修复
Before: "search is broken"
After: "users report search returns empty results for queries with hyphens. reproduce in src/search/. paste the error log if any. write a failing test for 'foo-bar' returning results, fix the root cause, run: pnpm test --filter search"Before: "search is broken"
After: "users report search returns empty results for queries with hyphens. reproduce in src/search/. paste the error log if any. write a failing test for 'foo-bar' returning results, fix the root cause, run: pnpm test --filter search"Example: UI/Visual
示例:UI/视觉设计
Before: "make the dashboard look better"
After: "implement the attached screenshot for the dashboard header in src/ui/DashboardHeader.tsx. match spacing and typography. take a new screenshot and list any differences. run: pnpm lint"Before: "make the dashboard look better"
After: "implement the attached screenshot for the dashboard header in src/ui/DashboardHeader.tsx. match spacing and typography. take a new screenshot and list any differences. run: pnpm lint"Example: Refactor
示例:重构
Before: "clean up the auth code"
After: "inspect src/auth and list duplication hotspots. propose a refactor plan scoped to one module. after approval, remove duplication without changing behavior. add a targeted test if coverage is missing. run the smallest relevant test command"Before: "clean up the auth code"
After: "inspect src/auth and list duplication hotspots. propose a refactor plan scoped to one module. after approval, remove duplication without changing behavior. add a targeted test if coverage is missing. run the smallest relevant test command"Example: Research
示例:研究
Before: "why is this API slow?"
After: "explore request flow around src/api/. summarize likely bottlenecks with evidence (logs, timings). propose 2-3 hypotheses and what data is needed to confirm. do not implement yet. if needed, ask for access to profiling output"Before: "why is this API slow?"
After: "explore request flow around src/api/. summarize likely bottlenecks with evidence (logs, timings). propose 2-3 hypotheses and what data is needed to confirm. do not implement yet. if needed, ask for access to profiling output"Example: Ops
示例:运维
Before: "deployment failed"
After: "deploy fails with error: [paste log]. identify the failing step in scripts/deploy.sh and related CI config. suggest a fix and a rollback plan. run: ./scripts/deploy.sh --dry-run (if available)"Before: "deployment failed"
After: "deploy fails with error: [paste log]. identify the failing step in scripts/deploy.sh and related CI config. suggest a fix and a rollback plan. run: ./scripts/deploy.sh --dry-run (if available)"Example: Docs
示例:文档
Before: "update the README"
After: "update README.md to include install + dev steps based on existing scripts. keep it concise. confirm commands exist and match actual scripts"Before: "update the README"
After: "update README.md to include install + dev steps based on existing scripts. keep it concise. confirm commands exist and match actual scripts"Step 4: Output Format
步骤4:输出格式
Output in the following format:
markdown
undefined按以下格式输出:
markdown
undefinedPrompt Analysis
Prompt Analysis
Original Prompt
Original Prompt
[User-provided prompt]
[User-provided prompt]
Issues
Issues
- [Issue 1 and its impact]
- [Issue 2 and its impact] ...
- [Issue 1 and its impact]
- [Issue 2 and its impact] ...
Missing Information (Questions to Ask)
Missing Information (Questions to Ask)
The following questions should be answered to make the prompt more effective:
- [Question 1] (Why it is needed)
- [Question 2] (Why it is needed) ...
The following questions should be answered to make the prompt more effective:
- [Question 1] (Why it is needed)
- [Question 2] (Why it is needed) ...
Verification Plan
Verification Plan
- Commands to run (tests, build, lint, screenshots)
- Expected results or acceptance criteria
- Commands to run (tests, build, lint, screenshots)
- Expected results or acceptance criteria
Exploration/Planning Recommendation
Exploration/Planning Recommendation
- Recommend exploration/planning first? [Yes/No] and why
- Recommend exploration/planning first? [Yes/No] and why
Execution Preference
Execution Preference
- Implement now / propose plan only / analyze only
- Any constraints on response length or format
- Implement now / propose plan only / analyze only
- Any constraints on response length or format
Improved Prompt
Improved Prompt
[The improved prompt]
[The improved prompt]
Document Improvement Suggestions (if applicable)
Document Improvement Suggestions (if applicable)
- [Issue and concrete improvement for the instruction document]
- [Issue and concrete improvement for the instruction document]
- [Issue and concrete improvement for the instruction document]
- [Issue and concrete improvement for the instruction document]
Revised Document (optional)
Revised Document (optional)
[A revised draft of the instruction document when helpful]
[A revised draft of the instruction document when helpful]
Improved Prompt Template (optional)
Improved Prompt Template (optional)
Use this as a fill-in template if the user wants a reusable prompt format:
[Task]
- Goal:
- Target files/paths (@...):
- Constraints (runtime/version/deps/security/compat):
- Context (symptom, logs, repro, links):
[Verification]
- Commands:
- Expected results:
- UI checks (screenshots/visual diffs):
[Exploration/Planning]
- Do exploration/planning first? (Yes/No) + reason:
[Execution Preference]
- Implement now / plan only / analyze only
- Output format (concise report, patch summary, checklist, etc.)Use this as a fill-in template if the user wants a reusable prompt format:
[Task]
- Goal:
- Target files/paths (@...):
- Constraints (runtime/version/deps/security/compat):
- Context (symptom, logs, repro, links):
[Verification]
- Commands:
- Expected results:
- UI checks (screenshots/visual diffs):
[Exploration/Planning]
- Do exploration/planning first? (Yes/No) + reason:
[Execution Preference]
- Implement now / plan only / analyze only
- Output format (concise report, patch summary, checklist, etc.)Short Prompt Template (optional)
Short Prompt Template (optional)
Use this when the user wants the shortest effective prompt:
Goal: ...
Targets: path1/path2
Context: symptom + repro + logs
Constraints: runtime/deps/compat
Verify: command + expected result
Explore/Plan: yes/no (why)
Execute: implement / plan only / analyze only
Output: concise formatUse this when the user wants the shortest effective prompt:
Goal: ...
Targets: path1/path2
Context: symptom + repro + logs
Constraints: runtime/deps/compat
Verify: command + expected result
Explore/Plan: yes/no (why)
Execute: implement / plan only / analyze only
Output: concise formatImprovement Points
Improvement Points
- [Explanation of improvement 1]
- [Explanation of improvement 2] ...
- [Explanation of improvement 1]
- [Explanation of improvement 2] ...
Additional Recommendations (optional)
Additional Recommendations (optional)
- [Whether to do exploration/planning first]
- [Whether to parallelize or delegate investigation]
- [Whether preliminary research is needed]
- [Ways to reduce context usage]
undefined- [Whether to do exploration/planning first]
- [Whether to parallelize or delegate investigation]
- [Whether preliminary research is needed]
- [Ways to reduce context usage]
undefinedReference: Best Practices Checklist
参考:最佳实践清单
Best practices to reference when improving prompts:
优化提示词时可参考的最佳实践:
Provide Verification Methods
提供验证方法
- Include test cases
- Specify expected output
- For UI changes, request screenshot comparison
- Add "run the tests" or "verify the build succeeds"
- Include explicit commands to run
- 包含测试用例
- 指定预期输出
- 对于UI变更,要求截图对比
- 添加“运行测试”或“验证构建成功”的要求
- 包含明确的运行命令
Explore → Plan → Implement Order
遵循“探索→规划→实现”的顺序
- Use an exploration/planning phase first for complex tasks
- Create a plan before implementation
- Small fixes don't need a formal plan
- When uncertain, ask clarifying questions before coding
- 复杂任务先进行探索/规划阶段
- 实现前先制定计划
- 小型修复无需正式计划
- 不确定时,先询问澄清问题再编码
Include Specific Context
包含具体上下文
- Paste error messages
- Specify existing patterns
- Clarify edge cases
- State environment constraints (runtime, language versions, dependencies)
- 粘贴错误信息
- 指定现有模式
- 明确边缘情况
- 说明环境约束(运行时、语言版本、依赖项)
Use Rich Inputs
使用丰富输入
- Paste logs and stack traces
- Provide URLs for docs or API references
- Attach or paste large text outputs when needed
- 粘贴日志和堆栈跟踪
- 提供文档或API参考的URL
- 必要时附加或粘贴大文本输出
Manage Context Window
管理上下文窗口
- Keep prompts concise and focused
- Remove unrelated history or speculation
- Ask for missing info instead of guessing
- 保持提示词简洁聚焦
- 删除无关历史或推测内容
- 询问缺失信息而非猜测
Leverage Parallelism/Delegation
利用并行处理/委托
- For research tasks: request parallel investigation or summaries
- For code review: request an independent review pass
- Keeps the main task focused
- 对于研究任务:要求并行调查或总结
- 对于代码审查:要求独立审查环节
- 保持主任务聚焦
Patterns to Avoid
需避免的模式
- Vague instructions like "make it better" or "improve it"
- Implementation requests without verification methods
- Multiple unrelated tasks at once
- Requesting changes to files not yet read
- Large context dumps with no clear signal
- 模糊指令,如“让它更好”或“优化它”
- 无验证方法的实现请求
- 同时要求完成多个无关任务
- 请求修改尚未读取的文件
- 包含无明确信号的大段上下文内容