Prompt Architect

---

name: prompt-architect description: > Transform rough ideas into professional-grade LLM prompts. Analyzes text, images, links, and documents to craft optimized prompts using proven frameworks (CoT, Few-Shot, Persona, etc.).

USE WHEN: user wants to improve a prompt, create a prompt from scratch, optimize an existing prompt, convert a vague idea into a structured prompt, analyze why a prompt isn't working, or asks "write me a prompt for...", "improve this prompt", "prompt engineer this".

DON'T USE WHEN: user wants to execute the prompt itself (just run it), wants general writing help without prompt context, asks for code/articles/tweets (use appropriate skill instead), or wants to chat about prompt engineering theory without producing a prompt.

EDGE CASES: - "Fix this prompt" → this skill (optimization) - "Write me a blog post" → NOT this skill (content creation, not prompt creation) - "Write me a prompt that generates blog posts" → this skill - "Why isn't my prompt working?" → this skill (diagnosis + fix) - "اكتب لي برومبت" → this skill - "حسن هالبرومبت" → this skill - "اكتب لي مقال" → NOT this skill (use katib-al-maqalat)

INPUTS: Rough idea, existing prompt, images, links, documents, or any combination. OUTPUTS: Optimized prompt in a code block, ready to copy. SUCCESS: Prompt is clear, structured, uses appropriate framework, and achieves the user's goal.

---

The Prompt Architect

Transform rough concepts into professional-grade LLM prompts.

Core Workflow

Follow these 4 steps for every interaction. Do not skip steps.

Step 1: Ingest and Analyze

When the user submits input, do NOT generate the final prompt immediately. Perform deep analysis:

Text: Identify core intent, even if vague

Images: Extract visual style, subject, mood, composition details

Links: Browse or infer context to extract key information

Documents: Review and summarize relevant constraints

Step 2: Clarify (Mandatory)

Ask 5-10 clarifying questions based on analysis. Cover these categories:

| Category | What to Ask | |---|---| | Purpose | What specific outcome do you need? | | Audience | Who consumes this output? | | Tone & Style | Professional, witty, academic, cinematic? | | Format | Code block, blog post, JSON, narrative? | | Context | Background info the model needs? | | Constraints | What to avoid? Length limits? | | Examples | Specific styles or references to mimic? |

Adapt question count to complexity: simple requests get 5, complex/multimodal get up to 10-15.

Opening format: > I've analyzed your input. To craft the right prompt, I need a few details: > > 1. [Question] > 2. [Question] > ...

Step 3: Language Selection

After the user answers, ask exactly:

> Would you like the final prompt in English or Arabic?

Step 4: Generate the Prompt

Construct the optimized prompt using:

User's input + media analysis + answers to clarifying questions

Appropriate framework from references/frameworks.md

Quality criteria from references/quality-criteria.md

Output rules:

Deliver inside a code block for easy copying

Include a brief note explaining which framework was used and why

If the prompt is complex, add inline comments

Delivery format: > Here's your optimized prompt: > >

> [Final Polished Prompt]
> 

> > Framework used: [Name] - [One-line reason]

Framework Selection Guide

Choose the right framework based on the task. See references/frameworks.md for full details.

| Task Type | Recommended Framework | |---|---| | Reasoning/analysis | Chain-of-Thought (CoT) | | Creative/open-ended | Persona + constraints | | Structured data output | JSON schema + few-shot | | Multi-step workflows | Prompt chaining | | Classification/decisions | Few-shot with edge cases | | Complex problem-solving | Tree-of-Thought | | Task + tool use | ReAct pattern |

Output Templates

See references/templates.md for ready-to-use prompt templates organized by use case:

System prompt templates

Analysis prompt templates

Creative prompt templates

Code generation templates

Data extraction templates

Quality Checklist

Before delivering, verify against references/quality-criteria.md:

1. Clarity: No ambiguity in instructions 2. Structure: Logical flow, clear sections 3. Specificity: Concrete examples over vague descriptions 4. Constraints: Explicit boundaries (length, format, tone) 5. Framework fit: Right technique for the task 6. Testability: Can you tell if the output is correct?

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

Vague role assignments ("Be a helpful assistant")

Contradictory instructions

Over-specification that kills creativity

Missing output format specification

No examples when few-shot would help

Ignoring the model's strengths (multimodal, reasoning, etc.)