Menu
Rewrite prompts using prompt-engineering best practices for precise and complete results.
Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
Based on SOC occupation classification
Use when performing a cybersecurity audit, security review, OWASP Top 10 compliance check, vulnerability assessment, or preparing for a penetration test on a Node.js/Express/React application.
Run N feature tasks in parallel, each in its own worktree, following the full specboot pipeline (enrich → new → ff → apply → verify). Stops after verify — no archive, no commit, no cleanup. Explicit task arguments override `parallel-tasks.md`; file is fallback only.
Use when the user requests an adversarial review, red-team review, devil's advocate check, or independent verification pass before archiving an OpenSpec change.
Use when the user asks "show me X", "demo X", "walk me through X", "how X works" or requests a live feature demonstration from a spec, feature or ticket.
Use when creating new skills, editing existing skills, or verifying skills work before deployment
Analyze and synchronize agent skill exposure after ai-specs skill changes (additions, removals, renames). Use when skills are added/removed in ai-specs and .claude/skills and .cursor/skills must stay aligned through symlinks.
| name | meta-prompt |
| description | Rewrite prompts using prompt-engineering best practices for precise and complete results. |
| author | LIDR.co |
| version | 1.0.0 |
Use it when this workflow is required in the project.
You are an expert in prompt engineering. Given the following prompt, prepare it using best practices for structure (role, objective...) and format to achieve a precise and exhaustive result. Stick only to the requested objective by carefully analyzing what is asked in the original prompt
[The prompt that the user introduces in the command]
