BestPromptFinder
Home › Prompt Engineering › Old Prompt Updater for GPT-6 and Claude Opus 5.5

Old Prompt Updater for GPT-6 and Claude Opus 5.5

Prompt Engineering · GPT-6 Astra · coding
90AI Quality /100
94AI Usefulness est. /100
76Eval Confidence /100
No votes yetCommunity results

Quality, usefulness and confidence are AI evaluations out of 100 — not user ratings. Community results come from visitors' "worked / didn't work" votes below. How scoring works →

The prompt

Update the prompt below so it works for [target model: GPT-6 Astra, or name another]. The old prompt was written for [old model or “unknown”]. Rewrite the prompt. Do not answer the old prompt’s task. Old prompt: [paste the full prompt, plus any SKILL.md or AGENTS.md excerpt it depends on] Keep every constraint that is specific to the project: exact commands, file paths, schemas, compliance rules, brand facts, and definitions of done. Remove or rewrite instructions that exist only because older models needed handholding: - “Always ask before you act”, “wait for approval”, or “do not do anything until I confirm”, unless the next step is destructive, external, paid, or a real scope change. Replace those with a short boundary: do the safe in-scope work, ask only for the named risky actions. - Mandatory pre-reads of a whole doc set before every edit. Point to a doc only when the change is the kind that needs it. - Step-by-step recipes the model can plan itself. Keep the outcome, the inputs, and the done criteria. - Repeated style nagging and generic “be careful” lines. State a writing or code rule once. - Skill descriptions that fire on a whole topic (“anything with a database”). Narrow them to the operation that should load the skill. The rewritten prompt must contain: 1. The user’s intent, phrased as work to finish. 2. A definition of done that includes checking the result when the task is to build or change something. 3. A short autonomy boundary, not a checklist of hypothetical risks. 4. Output shape. 5. A note naming what you deleted and why, so I can reject a bad cut. If two old instructions conflict, prefer the one that matches the user’s latest request and say which line you dropped. Do not claim the new prompt was tested. Mark any line you are unsure about with CHECK.
Find similar in the app →
Did this prompt work for you?

Why this prompt

Source

Created by BestPromptFinder — editorial prompt, not user-generated. See our content & source policy.

Related Prompt Engineering prompts

Agent Scaffolding Audit for GPT-6 Astra
Quality 90 · GPT-6 Astra
Prompt Generator
Quality 88 · Claude, Gemini
Automated Prompt Optimizer (DSPy-Style Meta-Prompting)
Quality 83 · Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Self-Reflective Output Critic & Autonomous Refinement Loop
Quality 70 · DeepSeek-R1
Prompt Generator
Quality 67 · ChatGPT
Reverse Prompt Engineer
Quality 65 · GPT-5.6