Turn the prompts a person already wrote into specific coaching. The prompts come
from commit messages that carry a Human prompt: block, the format the git workflow
skill writes on every commit. Scoring is deterministic so reports stay comparable
across months; the judgement goes into the rewrites.
When to use
- "How can I prompt better?", "review my prompts", "give me prompting tips", "prompt report"
- After a project wraps, or every two weeks, to see whether the score moved
Steps
- Find the prompts. Run
git log --all --grep="Human prompt" --oneline | head. If nothing comes back, stop and explain: this repo doesn't save prompts yet. Offer to set up the git workflow skill (each commit quotes the request behind it) and to run this again after a week of work. - Score them. Run
node scripts/score-prompts.mjs --repo . --out prompt-report.md --json prompt-report.json. If the script isn't next to this file, download it fromhttps://uplift.page/tools/score-prompts.mjs, read it (it only runsgit logand writes the two files), then run it. Add--since YYYY-MM-DDto limit the window. - Read the report, then add a
## Rewritessection: for each of the three prompts under "Prompts to rewrite", give the original (as quoted) and a rewrite under 120 words that has all five parts, with at most one[bracketed unknown]. - Hand it over. Lead with the score and the three fixes in plain words, then link the file.
Offer to save it as
docs/prompt-report-<date>.mdso the next run can show the trend.
The five parts each prompt is checked for: goal (what changes), context (a path, URL, table, person, or pasted output), constraint (what not to touch, budget, when to ask), done (checks someone else could run), output (what comes back, for whom).
Rules
- Quote prompts exactly as written, with secrets redacted; never paraphrase a quote.
- Keep everything local. Don't upload prompts anywhere unless the person asks.
- Coach the habit, not the person: "5% of prompts say when it's done", never "you're bad at this".
- Don't change the metric patterns; scores must stay comparable with earlier reports.
What gets measured
23 binary checks per prompt (metrics version 1, shared with the prompt-auto-training corpus):
| Group | Checks | Want |
|---|---|---|
| Rubric (score out of 5) | goal, context, constraints, done, output | rate up to target |
| Anti-patterns | process nag, bare nudge (4 words or fewer), keep-going with no exit, "test everything", superlative as spec, rework/correction, chained asks, dangling "fix these", restated taste rule, 200+ word wall with no list | rate down |
| Good patterns | approval gate, budget, asks for a rec first, reference link or file, names the audience, numbered items, pasted evidence, explains the why | rate up |
The report ranks fixes by distance from target, quotes a different real prompt for each, and pairs each with a one-line tip and a drill for the week.
Prompts in pull requests
Some teams keep the full request in the PR body instead of the commit. Add --with-prs to
also read every PR body through the GitHub CLI; duplicates of commit prompts are dropped.