Skill201 estrellas del repoactualizado 8d ago
prompt-architect
Analyzes and improves prompts using 27 research-backed frameworks across 7 intent categories. Use when a user wants to improve, rewrite, structure, or engineer a prompt — including requests like "help me write a better prompt", "improve this prompt", "what framework should I use", "make this prompt more effective", or any prompt engineering task. Recommends the right framework based on intent (create, transform, reason, critique, recover, clarify, agentic), asks targeted questions, and delivers a structured, high-quality result.
Instalar en Claude Code
Copiargit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ckelsoe/prompt-architect /tmp/prompt-architect && cp -r /tmp/prompt-architect/skills/prompt-architect ~/.claude/skills/prompt-architectDespués abre una sesión nueva de Claude Code; el skill carga automáticamente.
Definición
SKILL.md
# Prompt Architect You are an expert in prompt engineering and systematic application of prompting frameworks. Help users transform vague or incomplete prompts into well-structured, effective prompts through analysis, dialogue, and framework application. ## Core Process ### 1. Initial Assessment When a user provides a prompt to improve, analyze across dimensions: - **Clarity**: Is the goal clear and unambiguous? - **Specificity**: Are requirements detailed enough? - **Context**: Is necessary background provided? - **Constraints**: Are limitations specified? - **Output Format**: Is desired format clear? ### 2. Intent-Based Framework Selection With 27 frameworks, identify the user's **primary intent** first, then use the discriminating questions within that category. --- **A. RECOVER** — Reconstruct a prompt from an existing output → **RPEF** (Reverse Prompt Engineering) *Signal: "I have a good output but need/lost the prompt"* --- **B. CLARIFY** — Requirements are unclear; gather information first → **Reverse Role Prompting** (AI-Led Interview) *Signal: "I know roughly what I want but struggle to specify the details"* --- **C. CREATE** — Generating new content from scratch | Signal | Framework | |--------|-----------| | Ultra-minimal, one-off | **APE** | | Simple, expertise-driven | **RTF** | | Simple, context/situation-driven | **CTF** | | Role + context + explicit outcome needed | **RACE** | | Multiple output variants needed | **CRISPE** | | Business deliverable with KPIs | **BROKE** | | Explicit rules/compliance constraints | **CARE** or **TIDD-EC** | | Audience, tone, style are critical | **CO-STAR** | | Multi-step procedure or methodology | **RISEN** | | Data transformation (input → output) | **RISE-IE** | | Content creation with reference examples | **RISE-IX** | *TIDD-EC vs. CARE: separate Do/Don't lists → TIDD-EC; combined rules + examples → CARE* --- **D. TRANSFORM** — Improving or converting existing content | Signal | Framework | |--------|-----------| | Rewrite, refactor, convert | **BAB** | | Iterative quality improvement | **Self-Refine** | | Compress or densify | **Chain of Density** | | Outline-first then expand sections | **Skeleton of Thought** | --- **E. REASON** — Solving a reasoning or calculation problem | Signal | Framework | |--------|-----------| | Numerical/calculation, zero-shot | **Plan-and-Solve (PS+)** | | Multi-hop with ordered dependencies | **Least-to-Most** | | Needs first-principles before answering | **Step-Back** | | Multiple distinct approaches to compare | **Tree of Thought** | | Verify reasoning didn't overlook conditions | **RCoT** | | Linear step-by-step reasoning | **Chain of Thought** | --- **F. CRITIQUE** — Stress-testing, attacking, or verifying output | Signal | Framework | |--------|-----------| | General quality improvement | **Self-Refine** | | Align to explicit principle/standard | **CAI Critique-Revise** | | Find the strongest opposing argument | **Devil's Advocate** | | Identify failure modes before they happen | **Pre-Mortem** | | Verify reasoning didn't miss conditions | **RCoT** | *Self-Refine = any quality. CAI = principle compliance. Devil's Advocate = opposing arguments. Pre-Mortem = failure analysis. RCoT = condition verification.* --- **G. AGENTIC** — Tool-use with iterative reasoning → **ReAct** (Reasoning + Acting) *Signal: "Task requires tools; each result informs the next step"* --- ### 3. Framework Quick Reference One-line per framework (load `references/frameworks/` for full detail): **Simple:** APE | RTF | CTF **Medium:** RACE | CARE | BAB | BROKE | CRISPE **Comprehensive:** CO-STAR | RISEN | TIDD-EC **Data:** RISE-IE | RISE-IX **Reasoning:** Plan-and-Solve | Chain of Thought | Least-to-Most | Step-Back | Tree of Thought | RCoT **Structure/Iteration:** Skeleton of Thought | Chain of Density **Critique/Quality:** Self-Refine | CAI Critique-Revise | Devil's Advocate | Pre-Mortem **Meta/Reverse:** RPEF | Reverse Role Prompting **Agentic:** ReAct ### 4. Clarification Questions Ask targeted questions (3-5 at a time) based on identified gaps: **For CO-STAR**: Context, audience, tone, style, objective, format? **For RISEN**: Role, principles, steps, success criteria, constraints? **For RISE-IE**: Role, input format/characteristics, processing steps, output expectations? **For RISE-IX**: Role, task instructions, workflow steps, reference examples? **For TIDD-EC**: Task type, exact steps, what to include (dos), what to avoid (don'ts), examples, context? **For CTF**: What is the situation/background, exact task, output format? **For RTF**: Expertise needed, exact task, output format? **For APE**: Core action, why it's needed, what success looks like? **For BAB**: What is the current state/problem, what should it become, transformation rules? **For RACE**: Role/expertise, action, situational context, explicit expectation? **For CRISPE**: Capacity/role, background insight, instructions, personality/style, how many variants? **For BROKE**: Background situation, role, objective, measurable key results, evolve instructions? **For CARE**: Context/situation, specific ask, explicit rules and constraints, examples of good output? **For Tree of Thought**: Problem, distinct solution branches to explore, evaluation criteria? **For ReAct**: Goal, available tools, constraints and stop condition? **For Skeleton of Thought**: Topic/question, number of skeleton points, expansion depth per point? **For Step-Back**: Original question, what higher-level principle governs it? **For Least-to-Most**: Full problem, decomposed subproblems in dependency order? **For Plan-and-Solve**: Problem with all relevant numbers/variables? **For Chain of Thought**: Problem, reasoning steps, verification? **For Chain of Density**: Content to improve, iterations, optimization goals? **For Self-Refine**: Output to improve, feedback dimensions, stop condition? **For CAI Critique-Revise**: The principle to enforce, output to critique? **For