Best Cursor and Claude Code prompts (Explore → Plan → Implement → Verify)

You are exploring an unfamiliar codebase. Do NOT write or edit any files yet.

Goal: [describe the feature or bug in one sentence]

Tasks:
1. Map the relevant directories, entry points, and key modules.
2. Identify the data models, APIs, and UI surfaces involved.
3. List hidden dependencies, config flags, and tests that touch this area.
4. Flag risks: race conditions, auth boundaries, migrations, flaky tests.

Output format:
- ## Map (bullet tree of paths)
- ## Key files (path + one-line why it matters)
- ## Dependencies & config
- ## Risks & unknowns
- ## Suggested next questions for me

Stay concise. Prefer evidence from the repo over assumptions.

Based on the Explore findings below, produce an implementation plan. Do NOT edit files yet.

Explore findings:
[paste Explore output]

Change goal: [feature / bugfix]

Requirements for the plan:
1. Break work into ordered steps (each ≤ ~30 minutes of focused work).
2. For every step: files to touch, approach, and how we verify it.
3. Call out non-goals and what we will NOT change.
4. Include a rollback / feature-flag note if the change is risky.
5. End with acceptance criteria written as testable bullets.

Output:
## Summary (3–5 sentences)
## Steps (numbered)
## Non-goals
## Acceptance criteria
## Open questions (only if blocking)

Implement ONLY step [N] from the plan below. Do not start later steps.

Plan:
[paste Plan]

Constraints:
- Match existing code style, naming, and patterns in this repo.
- Prefer minimal diffs; no drive-by refactors.
- Update or add tests only if this step requires them.
- After changes, summarize: files changed, what you did, how to verify.

If something in the plan is wrong given the current code, stop and propose a plan amendment instead of improvising a large rewrite.

Review the changes for step [N] (or the full PR) against the acceptance criteria.

Acceptance criteria:
[paste]

Diff / changed files:
[paste or @ reference]

Produce:
1. ## Criteria checklist — each criterion: PASS / FAIL / UNTESTED + evidence
2. ## Test commands to run (exact shell commands for this repo)
3. ## Regression risks — what else might break
4. ## Code review notes — bugs, edge cases, security, perf (severity)
5. ## Ship decision — Ready / Needs fixes (list fixes)

Do not rewrite the feature unless a critical bug is found; prefer a short fix list.

Run Explore → Plan → Implement → Verify for this goal. Pause after Explore and after Plan for my approval before editing files.

Goal: [what to build or fix]
Repo context: [stack, important paths, constraints]
Definition of done: [acceptance criteria]

Rules:
- Explore: read-only, evidence-based map.
- Plan: ordered steps + acceptance criteria + non-goals.
- Implement: one approved step at a time, minimal diffs.
- Verify: criteria checklist + test commands + ship decision.

Start with Explore only.

Help me reproduce and isolate a bug before we plan a fix.

Reported issue: [symptoms]
Environment: [OS, version, branch]
Steps already tried: [list]

Do the following WITHOUT proposing a full rewrite:
1. Write a minimal reproduction checklist (exact steps).
2. Hypothesize 3 root causes ranked by likelihood, with the file/function to inspect for each.
3. Suggest the smallest probe (log, assertion, or failing test) that would falsify each hypothesis.
4. Ask me only for missing facts that block diagnosis.

Output as ## Reproduction, ## Hypotheses, ## Probes, ## Questions.