prompt-polisher

name

prompt-polisher

description

Use when receiving messy, unstructured input like voice transcriptions, stream-of-consciousness notes, or rough document content that needs to be transformed into a polished, optimized prompt. Cleans up filler words, extracts intent, asks clarifying questions, applies Claude 4.x/Opus 4.5/Sonnet 4.5 best practices, and previews the polished prompt for approval before execution. Trigger phrases include "polish this", "clean this up", "turn this into a prompt", or when input is clearly rough/unstructured.

Prompt Polisher

Transform messy, unstructured input into polished, Claude-optimized prompts using Anthropic's best practices.

When to Activate

Activate this skill when:

• User provides voice transcription content (contains filler words, self-corrections, casual speech)
• User dumps stream-of-consciousness notes
• User pastes rough document content that needs structuring
• User explicitly asks to "polish", "clean up", or "turn this into a prompt"
• Input is clearly unstructured and intended as task instructions

Workflow

Execute these stages in order:

Stage 1: Voice Cleanup

If the input appears to be voice transcription or casual speech, clean it up:

Remove:

• Filler words: "um", "uh", "like", "you know", "basically", "actually", "literally", "right?"
• Self-corrections: "no wait", "I mean", "actually scratch that", "let me rephrase"
• False starts: repeated or abandoned sentence beginnings
• Verbal tics: "okay so", "let me think", "hmm"

Normalize:

• Convert spoken patterns to written form
• Fix run-on sentences
• Add proper punctuation

Stage 2: Intent Extraction

Parse the cleaned input to identify:

Element	What to Find
Core task	What does the user actually want done?
Referenced files	Documents, project files, URLs mentioned
Constraints	Limitations, requirements, boundaries
Preferences	Style, format, approach preferences
Success criteria	What does "done" look like?
Scope	Single task vs. multi-step project

Stage 3: Gap Detection

Scan for missing or ambiguous elements:

• Ambiguous requirements ("process them somehow")
• Missing success criteria (no clear definition of "done")
• Unclear scope (single task or multi-step?)
• Format unspecified (code? prose? structured output?)
• Model unknown (Opus 4.5 or Sonnet 4.5?)
• Technical choices undefined (which library/approach/pattern?)

If gaps exist, ask ALL clarifying questions at once:

Before I polish this prompt, I need to clarify a few things:

1. [First gap-specific question]
2. [Second gap-specific question]
3. Which Claude model are you using? (Opus 4.5 / Sonnet 4.5 / Not sure)

Wait for user response before proceeding.

Stage 4: Apply Best Practices

Reference reference.md for detailed guidelines. Apply these transformations:

Universal (Claude 4.x):

• Make instructions explicit and direct (no hints)
• Add contextual framing (explain WHY, not just WHAT)
• Use positive framing ("use prose" not "don't use bullets")
• Structure with XML tags for complex inputs
• Use action-oriented language ("Change this" not "Can you suggest")
• Include chain of thought prompts for complex reasoning
• Define clear success criteria
• Use normal tone (avoid aggressive CAPS/MUST/CRITICAL)

If Opus 4.5:

• Add anti-over-engineering guardrail: "Keep solutions simple. Only make changes directly requested."
• Avoid the word "think" → use "consider", "evaluate", "believe"
• Leverage planning strength: "Build an editable plan before executing"
• Keep prompts token-efficient (don't over-pad)
• Provide policy/constraint context when relevant

If Sonnet 4.5:

• Break complex tasks into explicit steps
• Optimize for speed/throughput
• Add more explicit step-by-step guidance for intricate tasks

Stage 5: Structure the Prompt

Generate the polished prompt using this template:

<context>
[Background info, relevant project context, referenced files, WHY this task matters]
</context>

<task>
[Clear, explicit statement of what needs to be done - action-oriented]
</task>

<requirements>
[Specific constraints, boundaries, must-haves, technical choices]
</requirements>

<success_criteria>
[What "done" looks like, how to verify completion]
</success_criteria>

<approach>  <!-- Optional: include for complex tasks -->
[Suggested approach OR "Build an editable plan before executing"]
</approach>

Formatting rules:

• Keep each section focused and concise
• Use bullet points only when listing multiple items
• Omit sections that aren't relevant to the task
• For simple tasks, a streamlined version without XML tags is acceptable

Stage 6: Preview for Approval

Present the polished prompt to the user:

Here's your polished prompt:

---

[POLISHED PROMPT CONTENT]

---

**Options:**
- **Execute** - Run this prompt now
- **Edit** - I'll modify something first
- **Redo** - Start over with different clarifications

Wait for user approval before executing.

Stage 7: Execute or Iterate

Based on user choice:

• Execute: Immediately act on the polished prompt as if the user had typed it directly
• Edit: User modifies the prompt, then re-preview
• Redo: Return to Stage 1 with new input or Stage 3 for new clarifications

Important Notes

• Always preview before executing - never skip the approval step
• If the input is already well-structured, acknowledge this and offer minor polish only
• Learn from user feedback - if they frequently edit a certain way, note the pattern
• For very short/simple inputs, use a streamlined format without full XML structure
• The goal is USEFUL prompts, not LONG prompts - be concise

See Also

• reference.md - Detailed Anthropic best practices for Claude 4.x, Opus 4.5, and Sonnet 4.5
• examples.md - Before/after transformation examples