本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

prompt-optimizer

Turns rough intent or a weak prompt into a reliable one — diagnosing why output is inconsistent, restructuring the instruction, and adapting it across models. Use this when a prompt is not producing what was wanted, when output varies run to run, when writing a prompt for a repeated task, when moving a prompt between models, or when someone describes what they want an AI to do and needs it written properly.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md4.7 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Prompt optimizer

Diagnose before rewriting

Bad output has a small number of causes, and the fix differs entirely by cause:

  • Underspecified — the model is guessing at something you know. Most common by far.
  • Overspecified — so many constraints that they conflict, and the model satisfies some arbitrarily.
  • Wrong shape — asking for a paragraph when you want a table, or a decision when you want options.
  • No success criterion — nothing in the prompt says what good looks like, so quality varies with nothing.
  • Buried instruction — the actual task is in the middle of context and gets weighted like context.
  • Genuinely hard — the task needs information the model does not have, and no prompt fixes that. Say so rather than iterating.

Read the actual bad output before rewriting. The failure mode names the cause.

What reliably helps

  • Say what to do, not what to avoid. Negative instructions are weaker than positive ones and often summon the thing named.
  • Give the shape of the output — the sections, the length, the format. If format matters, show an example rather than describing it.
  • Provide one worked example where the task is judgment-heavy. Examples carry more instruction per token than description does, and one good one beats three mediocre.
  • State the audience and purpose. "For a technical reader deciding whether to adopt this" changes the output more than most adjectives.
  • Ask for reasoning before the answer on analytical tasks — order matters, since a conclusion stated first is defended rather than derived.
  • Give an out. Tell it what to do when the input is insufficient, or it will invent something.

What does not help

Politeness, threats, incentives, insisting on importance, and stacked superlatives. These consume tokens and change little. So does repeating an instruction in three phrasings — it usually signals the instruction is unclear rather than reinforcing it.

Structure

Put the task first, context second, and any output format last where it will be closest to generation. Long context between instruction and output is where instructions get lost.

For repeated prompts, separate the fixed instruction from the variable input explicitly, so the model can tell which is which.

Testing

A prompt is not done because one run looked good. Run it three to five times on the same input and look at the variance — that is the actual quality. Then run it on the awkward inputs: empty, far too long, ambiguous, adversarial.

Fix the worst case, not the average. The average is what you see in testing; the worst case is what your users see.

Producing variations

When a prompt matters enough to optimize, produce genuinely different versions rather than variants of one phrasing:

  • Terse — instruction only, minimal framing. Often outperforms, and it is cheapest.
  • Structured — explicit sections, numbered constraints, defined output shape.
  • Exemplar-led — one worked example carrying most of the instruction.
  • Role-framed — audience and stance set before the task.

Test all four on the same inputs. Which wins is genuinely hard to predict, and the intuition that a longer prompt is better is wrong about as often as it is right.

Scoring output

Judge against criteria written before seeing results, or you will rationalize whatever came back. For most tasks: did it do the task, is it correct, is it the right shape and length, is it usable without editing. Score each run rather than forming an overall impression — impressions are dominated by the best run, and the worst run is what matters.

Moving between models

Do not assume a prompt transfers. Models differ in how they weight system versus user instruction, how they handle long context, and how they respond to formatting. Re-test on the target model, and be especially suspicious of prompts tuned through many small iterations — those are often fitted to one model's quirks.

Never

  • Rewrite a prompt before reading the failing outputs. You will fix the wrong thing.
  • Change more than one thing between test runs.
  • Judge a change on a single output. Sampling variance will fool you.
  • Keep an instruction because it was already there. Every line has to earn its tokens.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Designs and audits who can reach what — authentication, authorization models, privileged access, service credentials, and joiner-mover-leaver process. Use this to design a permissions model, run an access review, reduce standing privilege, handle offboarding, set up SSO or MFA, manage service and machine credentials, or diagnose why permissions have sprawled.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

Concentrates marketing and sales effort on a named set of accounts rather than on volume — qualifying whether the model fits your economics at all, building the account list and the buying group inside each, tiering effort against account value, coordinating so the account experiences one campaign rather than several, and measuring account progression instead of leads. Use this to decide whether to run an account-based program, build one, or work out why an existing one produces activity and no pipeline.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

Gets new users from signup to first real value — signup flow, onboarding, time-to-value, and the early experience that determines whether someone becomes a user or a lapsed account. Use this to design or fix signup and onboarding, diagnose why signups do not convert to active use, reduce time-to-value, or decide what a new user must accomplish first.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

Designs orchestrator-and-subagent hierarchies for a repository — splitting agents by exclusive write surface, pairing every producer with an independent auditor, and enforcing the split with a script that runs in CI. Use this whenever the user wants to set up, expand, audit, or fix a multi-agent or subagent structure for a codebase; asks how to divide work between agents; wants agent charters, roles, or a surface map written; or is hitting agents that collide on the same files, review their own work, or drift from their remit. Also use when sizing a roster or deciding whether a new agent is justified.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

Governs models and AI systems in production — intended use, evaluation, monitoring, human oversight, documentation, and the decision to deploy or retire. Use this before deploying a model or AI feature, when defining evaluation criteria, when a model's behavior has drifted, when assessing AI risk or regulatory exposure, or when deciding whether an AI system is fit for a consequential decision.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

Produces executive-level research — market sizing, competitor mapping, trend analysis, and strategic intelligence — grounded in cited sources with the confidence in each claim made explicit. Use this to analyze a market or industry, map competitors, evaluate a market-entry or build-versus-buy decision, produce a research brief, or assemble evidence for a decision. Also use when comparing options that need a structured, evidence-based verdict rather than an opinion.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

cbrock84 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する