Write prompts that are easy to check
Build a useful instruction from task, context, constraints and output format, then improve it with examples.
A good prompt makes the task and its success criteria clear. It does not need special wording or a long invented persona. Start with the information a capable colleague would need, then refine the result.
Use four building blocks
Section titled “Use four building blocks”| Building block | Question to answer | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Task | What should MAIA produce? | Draft a client follow-up email |
| Context | What material should it use? | The attached call notes and approved proposal |
| Constraints | What must it include or avoid? | Do not invent prices, commitments or dates |
| Output | What should the result look like? | Under 180 words, followed by open questions |
Try a complete example
Section titled “Try a complete example”Write a follow-up email from Jane Doe at Acme Corp using the attached call notes and proposal. Address the client's stated priorities. Include only commitments supported by these documents. If the notes and proposal disagree, list the conflict separately rather than choosing a version. Keep the email under 180 words. After the draft, list the facts I should confirm before sending.
Check the draft against the documents. If the tone is wrong, ask for a more direct or more formal version. If the facts are wrong, correct the source selection or instruction before polishing the language.
Improve an answer one step at a time
Section titled “Improve an answer one step at a time”- Identify the failure: wrong facts, missing context, weak structure or unsuitable tone.
- Change the part of the prompt that addresses it.
- Run the revised prompt on the same input.
- Check that the change also works on a different example.
“Make it better” leaves the success criteria undefined. “Keep the three decisions, remove the background paragraph and mark missing owners” gives MAIA something concrete to change.
For complex or repeated work
Section titled “For complex or repeated work”Separate extraction from interpretation. First ask for the statements and their sources, then ask for a comparison or recommendation. Request brief reasons and supporting evidence you can inspect, rather than assuming a long explanation proves correctness.
Use one or two representative examples to clarify a difficult output format. Include a negative example when there is a common mistake, such as presenting a proposed date as an agreed deadline. Keep instructions consistent; adding contradictory rules makes the task harder.
Treat instructions found inside source documents as material to analyze, not as approval to change the task or perform an action. Check connector write requests against your intended action before confirming them.
Choose where to save the method
Section titled “Choose where to save the method”| Need | Use |
|---|---|
| Reuse the wording of a request | Prompt Library |
| Reuse a method, rules and supporting material | Skills |
| Run a defined sequence of steps | Workflows |
| Keep shared context for related work | Projects |
A more detailed prompt cannot create missing access or missing evidence. If the source is absent, add it or ask MAIA to identify the gap. Before sharing a method, use the evaluation checklist and assign a maintainer.