Initial commit

skills/prompt-engineering/checklists/prompt-quality-checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,388 @@
+# Prompt Quality Checklist
+
+Comprehensive checklist for verifying prompt quality before submission.
+
+---
+
+## Pre-Submission Checklist
+
+Use this checklist to evaluate any prompt before sending to an LLM.
+
+### Section 1: Content Clarity (Principles 1, 2, 9, 21, 25)
+
+**Essential Elements:**
+
+- [ ] **Task is specific** (not "help me" or "tell me about X")
+  - Clear action verb (explain, create, debug, compare, etc.)
+  - Specific topic or deliverable
+  - Example: ✅ "Debug this login function" vs ❌ "Help with code"
+
+- [ ] **Audience specified** (who is this for?)
+  - Experience level stated
+  - Background/context provided
+  - Example: ✅ "For junior developer" vs ❌ No audience mentioned
+
+- [ ] **Requirements explicitly stated**
+  - What must be included
+  - What constraints apply
+  - Success criteria defined
+  - Example: ✅ "Must support TypeScript, < 100 lines" vs ❌ Vague requirements
+
+- [ ] **Relevant context provided**
+  - Technology versions
+  - Environment details
+  - Constraints or limitations
+  - Why you need this
+  - Example: ✅ "React 18 + TypeScript for production SaaS" vs ❌ "React app"
+
+- [ ] **Detail level appropriate**
+  - Specific enough to avoid ambiguity
+  - Not so detailed it's overwhelming
+  - Includes examples where helpful
+  - Example: ✅ "Validate emails per RFC 5322" vs ❌ "Validate emails"
+
+**Score:** ___/5
+
+---
+
+### Section 2: Structure & Organization (Principles 3, 8, 17)
+
+**Structural Elements:**
+
+- [ ] **Complex tasks broken down**
+  - Multi-step tasks split into phases
+  - Clear sequence defined
+  - One focus per step
+  - Example: ✅ "Step 1: Design schema, Step 2: Create API" vs ❌ "Build everything"
+
+- [ ] **Delimiters used for sections**
+  - `###Headers###` for major sections
+  - Code blocks properly fenced
+  - Lists for related items
+  - Clear visual separation
+  - Example: ✅ Uses ###Task###, ###Requirements### vs ❌ Wall of text
+
+- [ ] **Output format specified**
+  - Exact structure desired (table, list, code, etc.)
+  - Format template provided if applicable
+  - Length/detail level indicated
+  - Example: ✅ "Return as JSON with fields: name, age" vs ❌ "Give me the data"
+
+**Score:** ___/3
+
+---
+
+### Section 3: Reasoning & Examples (Principles 12, 19, 20)
+
+**Thinking Guidance:**
+
+- [ ] **Step-by-step requested** (if applicable)
+  - Uses "step-by-step" or "think through"
+  - Numbered sequence for complex tasks
+  - Reasoning process requested
+  - Example: ✅ "Debug step-by-step: 1) Identify bug..." vs ❌ "Fix this"
+
+- [ ] **Chain-of-thought prompted** (for complex problems)
+  - Asks for reasoning
+  - Requests explanation of approach
+  - "Walk through your thinking"
+  - Example: ✅ "Explain your reasoning at each step" vs ❌ Direct answer only
+
+- [ ] **Examples provided** (when pattern matters)
+  - 2-3 examples of desired format
+  - Shows edge cases
+  - Demonstrates expected style
+  - Example: ✅ Shows input/output examples vs ❌ No examples
+
+**Score:** ___/3
+
+---
+
+### Section 4: Style & Tone (Principles 5, 10, 11, 22, 24, 26)
+
+**Expression Quality:**
+
+- [ ] **Language complexity appropriate**
+  - Matches audience level
+  - Technical terms explained if needed
+  - Simple when possible
+  - Example: ✅ Adjusts vocabulary to audience vs ❌ Assumes expertise
+
+- [ ] **Affirmative directives used**
+  - Says what TO do, not what NOT to do
+  - Positive framing
+  - Clear direction
+  - Example: ✅ "Use simple language" vs ❌ "Don't use complex words"
+
+- [ ] **Role assignment** (if beneficial)
+  - Specific expertise requested
+  - Perspective defined
+  - Helpful for domain tasks
+  - Example: ✅ "As a security expert, review..." vs ❌ Generic request
+
+- [ ] **Natural language**
+  - Conversational tone
+  - Not overly formal or robotic
+  - Human-like phrasing
+  - Example: ✅ "Explain how this works" vs ❌ "Elucidate the operational mechanics"
+
+- [ ] **Format preference stated**
+  - Bullets, paragraphs, tables, etc.
+  - Desired length indicated
+  - Style guidance provided
+  - Example: ✅ "Answer in bullet points, < 200 words" vs ❌ No format specified
+
+- [ ] **Leading words used**
+  - Directs response style
+  - Sets expectations
+  - Guides detail level
+  - Example: ✅ "Write a detailed analysis..." vs ❌ "Analysis"
+
+**Score:** ___/6
+
+---
+
+### Section 5: Advanced Techniques (Principles 4, 6, 7, 13-15, 18, 23)
+
+**Specialized Approaches:**
+
+- [ ] **Explanation requested** (complex topics)
+  - Asks "why" or "explain reasoning"
+  - Seeks understanding, not just answer
+  - Example: ✅ "Explain your technology choice" vs ❌ Just picks technology
+
+- [ ] **Unbiased approach** (sensitive topics)
+  - Explicitly requests objectivity
+  - Asks for multiple perspectives
+  - Example: ✅ "Present both sides objectively" vs ❌ Potentially biased framing
+
+- [ ] **Clarifying questions** (unclear requirements)
+  - Allows model to ask questions
+  - Admits uncertainty
+  - Example: ✅ "Ask me questions to clarify" vs ❌ Forces model to guess
+
+- [ ] **Comprehension testing** (learning)
+  - Includes quiz or practice
+  - Tests understanding
+  - Example: ✅ "Include 3 quiz questions" vs ❌ Explanation only
+
+- [ ] **Learning objectives** (educational content)
+  - Specific skills to gain
+  - Measurable outcomes
+  - Example: ✅ "Learner should be able to..." vs ❌ No objectives
+
+- [ ] **Multi-turn awareness** (complex projects)
+  - Acknowledges iterative process
+  - Plans for refinement
+  - Example: ✅ "Start with X, we'll refine later" vs ❌ Expects perfection first try
+
+**Score:** ___/6
+
+---
+
+## Scoring Guide
+
+**Total Score:** ___/23
+
+### Quality Levels:
+
+**20-23: Excellent Prompt** ✅
+- Highly likely to get quality response on first try
+- All essential elements present
+- Well-structured and clear
+- **Action:** Submit confidently
+
+**15-19: Good Prompt** ✅
+- Likely to get useful response
+- Minor improvements possible
+- Core elements covered
+- **Action:** Submit, but note areas for future improvement
+
+**10-14: Weak Prompt** ⚠️
+- May get partial or unclear response
+- Missing important elements
+- Needs significant improvement
+- **Action:** Revise before submitting
+
+**0-9: Ineffective Prompt** ❌
+- Unlikely to get useful response
+- Critical elements missing
+- Will require multiple clarifications
+- **Action:** Restart with template from examples/
+
+---
+
+## Quick Improvement Checklist
+
+If your score is < 15, apply these quick fixes:
+
+### Priority 1 (Essential - Fix These First)
+
+- [ ] Add specific task description (Principle 9)
+- [ ] Include relevant context (Principle 21)
+- [ ] State requirements clearly (Principle 25)
+
+### Priority 2 (Important - Significant Impact)
+
+- [ ] Use delimiters to structure (Principle 8)
+- [ ] Break down complex tasks (Principle 3)
+- [ ] Specify output format (Principle 17)
+
+### Priority 3 (Helpful - Polish)
+
+- [ ] Add examples if pattern matters (Principle 7, 20)
+- [ ] Specify audience (Principle 2)
+- [ ] Request step-by-step for complex tasks (Principle 12)
+
+---
+
+## Category-Specific Checklists
+
+### For Technical Prompts (Code/Debug/Architecture)
+
+**Must Have:**
+- [ ] Language/framework with version
+- [ ] Specific functionality or problem
+- [ ] Expected behavior clearly defined
+- [ ] Code examples or error messages
+- [ ] Test cases or success criteria
+
+**Should Have:**
+- [ ] Environment details (OS, dependencies)
+- [ ] Coding standards to follow
+- [ ] Performance requirements
+- [ ] Example input/output
+
+**Impact:** 85% → 95% first-response quality
+
+---
+
+### For Learning Prompts (Tutorials/Explanations)
+
+**Must Have:**
+- [ ] Target audience with experience level
+- [ ] Learning objectives defined
+- [ ] Concept to explain specified
+- [ ] Desired explanation structure
+
+**Should Have:**
+- [ ] Examples requested
+- [ ] Comprehension check included
+- [ ] Progressive complexity (basic → advanced)
+- [ ] Practice exercise
+
+**Impact:** 70% → 90% learner success
+
+---
+
+### For Creative Prompts (Writing/Ideation)
+
+**Must Have:**
+- [ ] Target audience specified
+- [ ] Tone/style guidelines
+- [ ] Length requirements
+- [ ] Purpose or use case
+
+**Should Have:**
+- [ ] Format preference (blog, email, etc.)
+- [ ] Key points to cover
+- [ ] Brand voice or examples
+- [ ] Constraints or avoid-list
+
+**Impact:** 60% → 85% satisfaction with output
+
+---
+
+### For Research Prompts (Analysis/Comparison)
+
+**Must Have:**
+- [ ] Research question specific
+- [ ] Scope defined (what to include/exclude)
+- [ ] Objectivity requested
+- [ ] Output format (report, table, bullets)
+
+**Should Have:**
+- [ ] Evaluation criteria
+- [ ] Use case context
+- [ ] Sources or data to consider
+- [ ] Decision framework
+
+**Impact:** 65% → 90% actionable insights
+
+---
+
+## Common Issues Checklist
+
+**If you're not getting good responses, check:**
+
+**Issue: Responses are too general**
+- [ ] Add more specific details (Principle 21)
+- [ ] Provide context and use case (Principle 2)
+- [ ] Include examples of what you want (Principle 7, 20)
+
+**Issue: Wrong format or structure**
+- [ ] Explicitly specify desired format (Principle 17)
+- [ ] Show an example of format (Principle 7)
+- [ ] Use delimiters to organize request (Principle 8)
+
+**Issue: Missing important aspects**
+- [ ] Break down into steps (Principle 3)
+- [ ] List all requirements explicitly (Principle 25)
+- [ ] Provide comprehensive context (Principle 21)
+
+**Issue: Too basic or too complex**
+- [ ] Specify audience level (Principle 2)
+- [ ] Adjust language complexity (Principle 5)
+- [ ] Provide background on current knowledge
+
+**Issue: Need multiple clarifying exchanges**
+- [ ] Be more direct about needs (Principle 9)
+- [ ] Provide all relevant details upfront (Principle 21)
+- [ ] Use structured format with sections (Principle 8)
+
+---
+
+## Final Validation
+
+**Before hitting send, ask yourself:**
+
+1. **Can someone else understand what I need?**
+   - If you showed this prompt to a colleague, would they know what you want?
+   - If NO → Add more context and specifics
+
+2. **Is this the minimum information needed?**
+   - Is every detail relevant?
+   - Is anything missing that would change the answer?
+   - If NO → Trim irrelevant info, add missing pieces
+
+3. **Is the desired output clear?**
+   - Would you recognize a good response if you saw it?
+   - Do you know what "done" looks like?
+   - If NO → Specify success criteria and format
+
+4. **Is this appropriately scoped?**
+   - Can this be answered in one response?
+   - Or should it be broken into multiple steps?
+   - If too large → Use Principle 3 to break down
+
+5. **Have I made assumptions?**
+   - Am I assuming the model knows my context?
+   - Am I assuming technical knowledge level?
+   - If YES → Make assumptions explicit
+
+---
+
+**Total Validation Checks:** ___/5
+
+If all 5 are "YES" → **Ready to submit!** ✅
+
+If any are "NO" → **Revise using the relevant section above**
+
+---
+
+**Quick Reference:**
+- **Excellent prompt** (20+ score): Clear task, structured, specific, examples provided
+- **Most common fixes**: Add delimiters (8), break down tasks (3), add details (21)
+- **Biggest impact principles**: 3, 7, 8, 17, 19, 21, 25
+
+**Template Library:** See [../templates/](../templates/) for ready-to-use formats