itsmostafa/llm-engineering-skills/prompt-engineering

# Vague
Analyze this data and give insights.
 
# Specific
Analyze this Q2 sales data for our board presentation.
1. Identify the top 3 revenue trends
2. Flag any anomalies exceeding 15% variance
3. Recommend 2-3 actionable next steps
Format as bullet points, max 200 words.

Your task is to anonymize customer feedback.
 
Instructions:
1. Replace customer names with "CUSTOMER_[ID]"
2. Replace emails with "EMAIL_[ID]@example.com"
3. Redact phone numbers as "PHONE_[ID]"
4. Leave product names intact
5. Output only processed messages, separated by "---"

Categorize customer feedback by issue type and sentiment.
 
<examples>
<example>
Input: The dashboard loads slowly and the export button is hidden.
Category: UI/UX, Performance
Sentiment: Negative
Priority: High
</example>
 
<example>
Input: Love the Salesforce integration! Would be great to add Hubspot.
Category: Integration, Feature Request
Sentiment: Positive
Priority: Medium
</example>
</examples>
 
Now categorize: {{FEEDBACK}}

Determine the best investment option for this client. Think step-by-step.

Think before answering:
1. Consider the client's risk tolerance given their 5-year timeline
2. Calculate potential returns for each option
3. Factor in market volatility history
4. Then provide your recommendation

Analyze this contract for legal risks.
 
Before answering, check:
- Indemnification implications
- Liability exposure
- IP ownership concerns
 
Then provide:
<answer>
- Top risks
- Recommended edits
- Open questions
</answer>

<instructions>Task steps and requirements</instructions>
<context>Background information</context>
<document>Source material to process</document>
<example>Demonstration of expected behavior</example>
<constraints>Boundaries and limitations</constraints>
<output_format>Expected response structure</output_format>

<documents>
  <document index="1">
    <source>annual_report_2023.pdf</source>
    <content>{{REPORT_CONTENT}}</content>
  </document>
  <document index="2">
    <source>competitor_analysis.xlsx</source>
    <content>{{ANALYSIS_CONTENT}}</content>
  </document>
</documents>
 
<instructions>
Compare revenue trends across both documents.
Identify strategic advantages mentioned in the annual report.
</instructions>

Using the contract in <contract> tags, identify all clauses
related to termination.

system = "You are a senior securities lawyer at a Fortune 500 company."
user = "Review this acquisition agreement for regulatory risks."

# General
You are a [role] at [organization type].
 
# Specific (better)
You are the General Counsel of a Fortune 500 tech company
specializing in M&A transactions.
 
# With behavioral guidance (best)
You are a senior data scientist. You prioritize statistical
rigor over speed. When uncertain, you state assumptions
explicitly and suggest validation approaches.

<documents>
{{LARGE_DOCUMENT_CONTENT}}
</documents>
 
<instructions>
Summarize the key findings from the document above.
Focus on financial implications.
</instructions>

<documents>
{{PATIENT_RECORDS}}
</documents>
 
First, find and quote the relevant sections in <quotes> tags.
Then provide your diagnosis in <analysis> tags, referencing
the quoted evidence.

<documents>
  <document index="1">
    <source>quarterly_report_q2.pdf</source>
    <date>2024-07-15</date>
    <content>{{CONTENT}}</content>
  </document>
</documents>

<output_format>
- Default responses: 3-6 sentences or ≤5 bullets
- Simple factual questions: ≤2 sentences
- Complex analysis: 1 overview paragraph + ≤5 tagged bullets
</output_format>

Output requirements:
- Use markdown tables for comparisons
- Code blocks for any technical content
- No introductory phrases ("Here's...", "Sure...")
- End with exactly 3 action items

Implement EXACTLY and ONLY what is requested.
- Do not add features beyond the specification
- Do not refactor surrounding code
- Choose the simplest valid interpretation
- Ask for clarification rather than assuming

<verification>
Before finalizing your response:
1. Re-read the original request
2. Check that all requirements are addressed
3. Verify any specific claims against provided documents
4. Soften language where certainty is low
5. Flag any assumptions you made
</verification>

When uncertain:
- Explicitly state "Based on the provided context..."
- Offer 2-3 plausible interpretations if ambiguous
- Never fabricate specific details (dates, numbers, quotes)
- Say "I don't have enough information to..." when applicable