Initial commit
This commit is contained in:
Zhongwei Li
296
skills/create-meta-prompts/references/refine-patterns.md
Normal file
296
skills/create-meta-prompts/references/refine-patterns.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,296 @@
|
||||
<overview>
|
||||
Prompt patterns for improving existing research or plan outputs based on feedback.
|
||||
</overview>
|
||||
|
||||
<prompt_template>
|
||||
```xml
|
||||
<objective>
|
||||
Refine {topic}-{original_purpose} based on feedback.
|
||||
|
||||
Target: @.prompts/{num}-{topic}-{original_purpose}/{topic}-{original_purpose}.md
|
||||
Current summary: @.prompts/{num}-{topic}-{original_purpose}/SUMMARY.md
|
||||
|
||||
Purpose: {What improvement is needed}
|
||||
Output: Updated {topic}-{original_purpose}.md with improvements
|
||||
</objective>
|
||||
|
||||
<context>
|
||||
Original output: @.prompts/{num}-{topic}-{original_purpose}/{topic}-{original_purpose}.md
|
||||
</context>
|
||||
|
||||
<feedback>
|
||||
{Specific issues to address}
|
||||
{What was missing or insufficient}
|
||||
{Areas needing more depth}
|
||||
</feedback>
|
||||
|
||||
<preserve>
|
||||
{What worked well and should be kept}
|
||||
{Structure or findings to maintain}
|
||||
</preserve>
|
||||
|
||||
<requirements>
|
||||
- Address all feedback points
|
||||
- Maintain original structure and metadata format
|
||||
- Keep what worked from previous version
|
||||
- Update confidence based on improvements
|
||||
- Clearly improve on identified weaknesses
|
||||
</requirements>
|
||||
|
||||
<output>
|
||||
1. Archive current output to: `.prompts/{num}-{topic}-{original_purpose}/archive/{topic}-{original_purpose}-v{n}.md`
|
||||
2. Write improved version to: `.prompts/{num}-{topic}-{original_purpose}/{topic}-{original_purpose}.md`
|
||||
3. Create SUMMARY.md with version info and changes from previous
|
||||
</output>
|
||||
|
||||
<summary_requirements>
|
||||
Create `.prompts/{num}-{topic}-{original_purpose}/SUMMARY.md`
|
||||
|
||||
Load template: [summary-template.md](summary-template.md)
|
||||
|
||||
For Refine, always include:
|
||||
- Version with iteration info (e.g., "v2 (refined from v1)")
|
||||
- Changes from Previous section listing what improved
|
||||
- Updated confidence if gaps were filled
|
||||
</summary_requirements>
|
||||
|
||||
<success_criteria>
|
||||
- All feedback points addressed
|
||||
- Original structure maintained
|
||||
- Previous version archived
|
||||
- SUMMARY.md reflects version and changes
|
||||
- Quality demonstrably improved
|
||||
</success_criteria>
|
||||
```
|
||||
</prompt_template>
|
||||
|
||||
<key_principles>
|
||||
|
||||
<preserve_context>
|
||||
Refine builds on existing work, not replaces it:
|
||||
```xml
|
||||
<context>
|
||||
Original output: @.prompts/001-auth-research/auth-research.md
|
||||
|
||||
Key strengths to preserve:
|
||||
- Library comparison structure
|
||||
- Security recommendations
|
||||
- Code examples format
|
||||
</context>
|
||||
```
|
||||
</preserve_context>
|
||||
|
||||
<specific_feedback>
|
||||
Feedback must be actionable:
|
||||
```xml
|
||||
<feedback>
|
||||
Issues to address:
|
||||
- Security analysis was surface-level - need CVE references and vulnerability patterns
|
||||
- Performance benchmarks missing - add actual timing data
|
||||
- Rate limiting patterns not covered
|
||||
|
||||
Do NOT change:
|
||||
- Library comparison structure
|
||||
- Recommendation format
|
||||
</feedback>
|
||||
```
|
||||
</specific_feedback>
|
||||
|
||||
<version_tracking>
|
||||
Archive before overwriting:
|
||||
```xml
|
||||
<output>
|
||||
1. Archive: `.prompts/001-auth-research/archive/auth-research-v1.md`
|
||||
2. Write improved: `.prompts/001-auth-research/auth-research.md`
|
||||
3. Update SUMMARY.md with version info
|
||||
</output>
|
||||
```
|
||||
</version_tracking>
|
||||
|
||||
</key_principles>
|
||||
|
||||
<refine_types>
|
||||
|
||||
<deepen_research>
|
||||
When research was too surface-level:
|
||||
|
||||
```xml
|
||||
<objective>
|
||||
Refine auth-research based on feedback.
|
||||
|
||||
Target: @.prompts/001-auth-research/auth-research.md
|
||||
</objective>
|
||||
|
||||
<feedback>
|
||||
- Security analysis too shallow - need specific vulnerability patterns
|
||||
- Missing performance benchmarks
|
||||
- Rate limiting not covered
|
||||
</feedback>
|
||||
|
||||
<preserve>
|
||||
- Library comparison structure
|
||||
- Code example format
|
||||
- Recommendation priorities
|
||||
</preserve>
|
||||
|
||||
<requirements>
|
||||
- Add CVE references for common vulnerabilities
|
||||
- Include actual benchmark data from library docs
|
||||
- Add rate limiting patterns section
|
||||
- Increase confidence if gaps are filled
|
||||
</requirements>
|
||||
```
|
||||
</deepen_research>
|
||||
|
||||
<expand_scope>
|
||||
When research missed important areas:
|
||||
|
||||
```xml
|
||||
<objective>
|
||||
Refine stripe-research to include webhooks.
|
||||
|
||||
Target: @.prompts/005-stripe-research/stripe-research.md
|
||||
</objective>
|
||||
|
||||
<feedback>
|
||||
- Webhooks section completely missing
|
||||
- Need signature verification patterns
|
||||
- Retry handling not covered
|
||||
</feedback>
|
||||
|
||||
<preserve>
|
||||
- API authentication section
|
||||
- Checkout flow documentation
|
||||
- Error handling patterns
|
||||
</preserve>
|
||||
|
||||
<requirements>
|
||||
- Add comprehensive webhooks section
|
||||
- Include signature verification code examples
|
||||
- Cover retry and idempotency patterns
|
||||
- Update summary to reflect expanded scope
|
||||
</requirements>
|
||||
```
|
||||
</expand_scope>
|
||||
|
||||
<update_plan>
|
||||
When plan needs adjustment:
|
||||
|
||||
```xml
|
||||
<objective>
|
||||
Refine auth-plan to add rate limiting phase.
|
||||
|
||||
Target: @.prompts/002-auth-plan/auth-plan.md
|
||||
</objective>
|
||||
|
||||
<feedback>
|
||||
- Rate limiting was deferred but is critical for production
|
||||
- Should be its own phase, not bundled with tests
|
||||
</feedback>
|
||||
|
||||
<preserve>
|
||||
- Phase 1-3 structure
|
||||
- Dependency chain
|
||||
- Task granularity
|
||||
</preserve>
|
||||
|
||||
<requirements>
|
||||
- Insert Phase 4: Rate limiting
|
||||
- Adjust Phase 5 (tests) to depend on rate limiting
|
||||
- Update phase count in summary
|
||||
- Ensure new phase is prompt-sized
|
||||
</requirements>
|
||||
```
|
||||
</update_plan>
|
||||
|
||||
<correct_errors>
|
||||
When output has factual errors:
|
||||
|
||||
```xml
|
||||
<objective>
|
||||
Refine jwt-research to correct library recommendation.
|
||||
|
||||
Target: @.prompts/003-jwt-research/jwt-research.md
|
||||
</objective>
|
||||
|
||||
<feedback>
|
||||
- jsonwebtoken recommendation is outdated
|
||||
- jose is now preferred for security and performance
|
||||
- Bundle size comparison was incorrect
|
||||
</feedback>
|
||||
|
||||
<preserve>
|
||||
- Research structure
|
||||
- Security best practices section
|
||||
- Token storage recommendations
|
||||
</preserve>
|
||||
|
||||
<requirements>
|
||||
- Update library recommendation to jose
|
||||
- Correct bundle size data
|
||||
- Add note about jsonwebtoken deprecation concerns
|
||||
- Lower confidence if other findings may need verification
|
||||
</requirements>
|
||||
```
|
||||
</correct_errors>
|
||||
|
||||
</refine_types>
|
||||
|
||||
<folder_structure>
|
||||
Refine prompts get their own folder (new number), but output goes to the original folder:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
.prompts/
|
||||
├── 001-auth-research/
|
||||
│ ├── completed/
|
||||
│ │ └── 001-auth-research.md # Original prompt
|
||||
│ ├── archive/
|
||||
│ │ └── auth-research-v1.md # Archived v1
|
||||
│ ├── auth-research.md # Current (v2)
|
||||
│ └── SUMMARY.md # Reflects v2
|
||||
├── 004-auth-research-refine/
|
||||
│ ├── completed/
|
||||
│ │ └── 004-auth-research-refine.md # Refine prompt
|
||||
│ └── (no output here - goes to 001)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This maintains:
|
||||
- Clear prompt history (each prompt is numbered)
|
||||
- Single source of truth for each output
|
||||
- Visible iteration count in SUMMARY.md
|
||||
</folder_structure>
|
||||
|
||||
<execution_notes>
|
||||
|
||||
<dependency_handling>
|
||||
Refine prompts depend on the target output existing:
|
||||
- Check target file exists before execution
|
||||
- If target folder missing, offer to create the original prompt first
|
||||
|
||||
```xml
|
||||
<dependency_check>
|
||||
If `.prompts/{num}-{topic}-{original_purpose}/{topic}-{original_purpose}.md` not found:
|
||||
- Error: "Cannot refine - target output doesn't exist"
|
||||
- Offer: "Create the original {purpose} prompt first?"
|
||||
</dependency_check>
|
||||
```
|
||||
</dependency_handling>
|
||||
|
||||
<archive_creation>
|
||||
Before overwriting, ensure archive exists:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
mkdir -p .prompts/{num}-{topic}-{original_purpose}/archive/
|
||||
mv .prompts/{num}-{topic}-{original_purpose}/{topic}-{original_purpose}.md \
|
||||
.prompts/{num}-{topic}-{original_purpose}/archive/{topic}-{original_purpose}-v{n}.md
|
||||
```
|
||||
</archive_creation>
|
||||
|
||||
<summary_update>
|
||||
SUMMARY.md must reflect the refinement:
|
||||
- Update version number
|
||||
- Add "Changes from Previous" section
|
||||
- Update one-liner if findings changed
|
||||
- Update confidence if improved
|
||||
</summary_update>
|
||||
|
||||
</execution_notes>
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user