MCP serverSave straight from your agent

About us How it works FAQ Blog Contact us

Home Explore Create Sign in

Explore

Loading…

Explore

Tagged #research

Active New Most used Recommended

All AI & Prompt Engineering324 Engineering176 Data & Analytics89 Product4

Browse by tag

#ai314#chatgpt211#claude208#gemini208#prompting182#agents174#context-engineering172#coding160

Customer Success3

People & Recruiting4

Security & Compliance8

Other Professional1

#researchClear filters

LELeo Fischer@leofischer·3w ago

Gemini found the hole in my a research prompt that cites its work plan

A compact prompt and the response it produced. Replace the bracketed parts with your own details.

Leo Fischer

For a research prompt that cites its work, should I build a complete plan first or test one small slice? I have limited time and I do not want throwaway work.

Geminigemini-2.5-pro

Test one slice, but choose a slice that crosses the riskiest part of the problem. A tiny easy demo will only prove the easy part. Use this decision rule: - If reversing the choice is cheap, try it. - If the choice locks in data, money, or other people’s time, write the full decision first. - If uncertainty is concentrated in one step, test that step before planning around it. For a research prompt that cites its work, make the first test produce evidence you can compare, not just something that looks complete.

Show all 3 messages

3411.4k

LELeo Fischer@leofischer·1mo ago

My notes from fixing a research prompt that cites its work

This started as a messy question about a research prompt that cites its work. The follow-up made the answer practical.

Leo Fischer

I am stuck on a research prompt that cites its work. I need to research a question, separate facts from inference, and attach sources to each claim, but my current attempt is getting vague and too big. What would you check first?

ChatGPTgpt-5

First, shrink the decision. Do not solve the whole subject at once. 1. Put the source of truth in the prompt. 2. Mark missing evidence instead of filling it in. 3. Add a stop condition before tool use. Write down the result you need by the end of this session. Then choose one input you trust and make a first pass that can be checked. If that pass fails, you will know which assumption to revisit instead of starting over.

Show all 3 messages

3413.9k

CACaleb Bose@calebbose·3w ago

A blunt review of my approach to a competitor brief

The useful bit was asking for trade-offs and a smallest test before committing to a full plan.

Caleb Bose

Give me a short checklist for a competitor brief. I want something I can run before I call the work done.

ChatGPTgpt-5

Use this pass: - [ ] The goal is one sentence and names the user or decision - [ ] Inputs are current, relevant, and traceable - [ ] Assumptions are visible - [ ] Start from observed behavior - [ ] Write the riskiest assumption down - [ ] Choose a measurable next test - [ ] One failure case has been tested - [ ] The next owner and next action are clear If you cannot check an item, mark it unknown. Do not quietly treat unknown as done.

Show all 3 messages

330849

CACaleb Bose@calebbose·1mo ago

How I ask for help with a competitor brief

Sharing the wording because it gave me something I could check instead of a confident wall of text.

Caleb Bose

Be blunt about my plan for a competitor brief. I am going to collect everything, ask for a polished answer, and fix details later. What is likely to go wrong?

Claudeclaude-opus-4.5

Three things. - “Everything” has no boundary, so weak inputs and strong inputs will be treated alike. - A polished answer can hide missing evidence. Ask for gaps and assumptions before prose. - “Fix details later” means there is no acceptance test now. A safer sequence is: define the decision, choose the minimum trusted inputs, make an ugly first pass, check it, then polish. For this task, write the riskiest assumption down.

Show all 3 messages

3302.3k

CACaleb Bose@calebbose·2mo ago

What finally made a competitor brief click for me

The useful bit was asking for trade-offs and a smallest test before committing to a full plan.

Caleb Bose

Help me compare competitors by customer, workflow, pricing, and evidence without copying marketing claims. Context: - Goal: [what a good result lets me do] - Current situation: [paste notes, draft, data, or constraints] - Audience: [who will use the result] - Deadline or limit: [time, budget, tools, length] Before answering, ask up to three questions only if the answers would materially change you

Geminigemini-2.5-pro

This is usable as written. The important parts are the definition of done, the instruction to expose assumptions, and the request for a smallest test. For a competitor brief, I would start with these checks: - Start from observed behavior - Write the riskiest assumption down - Choose a measurable next test If you share real material, remove anything private first and replace bracketed fields with concrete details.

Show all 3 messages

3303.7k

LELeo Fischer@leofischer·2mo ago

A blunt review of my approach to a research prompt that cites its work

Sharing the wording because it gave me something I could check instead of a confident wall of text.

Leo Fischer

Give me a short checklist for a research prompt that cites its work. I want something I can run before I call the work done.

ChatGPTgpt-5

Use this pass: - [ ] The goal is one sentence and names the user or decision - [ ] Inputs are current, relevant, and traceable - [ ] Assumptions are visible - [ ] Put the source of truth in the prompt - [ ] Mark missing evidence instead of filling it in - [ ] Add a stop condition before tool use - [ ] One failure case has been tested - [ ] The next owner and next action are clear If you cannot check an item, mark it unknown. Do not quietly treat unknown as done.

Show all 3 messages

3312.8k

CACaleb Bose@calebbose·3mo ago

Gemini found the hole in my a competitor brief plan

This started as a messy question about a competitor brief. The follow-up made the answer practical.

Caleb Bose

For a competitor brief, should I build a complete plan first or test one small slice? I have limited time and I do not want throwaway work.

Geminigemini-2.5-pro

Test one slice, but choose a slice that crosses the riskiest part of the problem. A tiny easy demo will only prove the easy part. Use this decision rule: - If reversing the choice is cheap, try it. - If the choice locks in data, money, or other people’s time, write the full decision first. - If uncertainty is concentrated in one step, test that step before planning around it. For a competitor brief, make the first test produce evidence you can compare, not just something that looks complete.

Show all 3 messages

3403.7k

RARavi Gupta@ravigupta·2w ago

Forked from@leofischer/What finally made a research prompt that cites its work click for me

What finally made a research prompt that cites its work click for me

Sharing the wording because it gave me something I could check instead of a confident wall of text.

Ravi Gupta

Help me research a question, separate facts from inference, and attach sources to each claim. Context: - Goal: [what a good result lets me do] - Current situation: [paste notes, draft, data, or constraints] - Audience: [who will use the result] - Deadline or limit: [time, budget, tools, length] Before answering, ask up to three questions only if the answers would materially change your recommendat

Geminigemini-2.5-pro

This is usable as written. The important parts are the definition of done, the instruction to expose assumptions, and the request for a smallest test. For a research prompt that cites its work, I would start with these checks: - Put the source of truth in the prompt - Mark missing evidence instead of filling it in - Add a stop condition before tool use If you share real material, remove anything private first and replace bracketed fields with concrete details.

Show all 3 messages

3200

BEBen Haddad@benhaddad·2w ago

Forked from@leofischer/My notes from fixing a research prompt that cites its work

My notes from fixing a research prompt that cites its work

This started as a messy question about a research prompt that cites its work. The follow-up made the answer practical.

Ben Haddad

I am stuck on a research prompt that cites its work. I need to research a question, separate facts from inference, and attach sources to each claim, but my current attempt is getting vague and too big. What would you check first?

ChatGPTgpt-5

First, shrink the decision. Do not solve the whole subject at once. 1. Put the source of truth in the prompt. 2. Mark missing evidence instead of filling it in. 3. Add a stop condition before tool use. Write down the result you need by the end of this session. Then choose one input you trust and make a first pass that can be checked. If that pass fails, you will know which assumption to revisit instead of starting over.

Show all 3 messages

3200

LALayla Fischer@laylafischer·2w ago

Forked from@leofischer/How I ask for help with a research prompt that cites its work

How I ask for help with a research prompt that cites its work

The useful bit was asking for trade-offs and a smallest test before committing to a full plan.

Layla Fischer

Be blunt about my plan for a research prompt that cites its work. I am going to collect everything, ask for a polished answer, and fix details later. What is likely to go wrong?

Claudeclaude-opus-4.5

Three things. - “Everything” has no boundary, so weak inputs and strong inputs will be treated alike. - A polished answer can hide missing evidence. Ask for gaps and assumptions before prose. - “Fix details later” means there is no acceptance test now. A safer sequence is: define the decision, choose the minimum trusted inputs, make an ugly first pass, check it, then polish. For this task, mark missing evidence instead of filling it in.

Show all 3 messages

3200

QUQuinn Harper@quinnharper·2w ago

Forked from@leofischer/Gemini found the hole in my a research prompt that cites its work plan

Gemini found the hole in my a research prompt that cites its work plan

A compact prompt and the response it produced. Replace the bracketed parts with your own details.

Quinn Harper

For a research prompt that cites its work, should I build a complete plan first or test one small slice? I have limited time and I do not want throwaway work.

Geminigemini-2.5-pro

Test one slice, but choose a slice that crosses the riskiest part of the problem. A tiny easy demo will only prove the easy part. Use this decision rule: - If reversing the choice is cheap, try it. - If the choice locks in data, money, or other people’s time, write the full decision first. - If uncertainty is concentrated in one step, test that step before planning around it. For a research prompt that cites its work, make the first test produce evidence you can compare, not just something that looks complete.

Show all 3 messages

3200

BEBen Brooks@benbrooks·2w ago

Forked from@leofischer/A blunt review of my approach to a research prompt that cites its work

A blunt review of my approach to a research prompt that cites its work

Sharing the wording because it gave me something I could check instead of a confident wall of text.

Ben Brooks

Give me a short checklist for a research prompt that cites its work. I want something I can run before I call the work done.

ChatGPTgpt-5

Use this pass: - [ ] The goal is one sentence and names the user or decision - [ ] Inputs are current, relevant, and traceable - [ ] Assumptions are visible - [ ] Put the source of truth in the prompt - [ ] Mark missing evidence instead of filling it in - [ ] Add a stop condition before tool use - [ ] One failure case has been tested - [ ] The next owner and next action are clear If you cannot check an item, mark it unknown. Do not quietly treat unknown as done.

Show all 3 messages

3200

LELeo Fischer@leofischer·3mo ago

What finally made a research prompt that cites its work click for me

Sharing the wording because it gave me something I could check instead of a confident wall of text.

Leo Fischer

Help me research a question, separate facts from inference, and attach sources to each claim. Context: - Goal: [what a good result lets me do] - Current situation: [paste notes, draft, data, or constraints] - Audience: [who will use the result] - Deadline or limit: [time, budget, tools, length] Before answering, ask up to three questions only if the answers would materially change your recommendat

Geminigemini-2.5-pro

This is usable as written. The important parts are the definition of done, the instruction to expose assumptions, and the request for a smallest test. For a research prompt that cites its work, I would start with these checks: - Put the source of truth in the prompt - Mark missing evidence instead of filling it in - Add a stop condition before tool use If you share real material, remove anything private first and replace bracketed fields with concrete details.

Show all 3 messages

3312.5k

LELeo Fischer@leofischer·3mo ago

How I ask for help with a research prompt that cites its work

The useful bit was asking for trade-offs and a smallest test before committing to a full plan.

Leo Fischer

Be blunt about my plan for a research prompt that cites its work. I am going to collect everything, ask for a polished answer, and fix details later. What is likely to go wrong?

Claudeclaude-opus-4.5

Three things. - “Everything” has no boundary, so weak inputs and strong inputs will be treated alike. - A polished answer can hide missing evidence. Ask for gaps and assumptions before prose. - “Fix details later” means there is no acceptance test now. A safer sequence is: define the decision, choose the minimum trusted inputs, make an ugly first pass, check it, then polish. For this task, mark missing evidence instead of filling it in.

Show all 3 messages

3311.1k

CACaleb Bose@calebbose·3mo ago

My notes from fixing a competitor brief

A compact prompt and the response it produced. Replace the bracketed parts with your own details.

Caleb Bose

I am stuck on a competitor brief. I need to compare competitors by customer, workflow, pricing, and evidence without copying marketing claims, but my current attempt is getting vague and too big. What would you check first?

ChatGPTgpt-5

First, shrink the decision. Do not solve the whole subject at once. 1. Start from observed behavior. 2. Write the riskiest assumption down. 3. Choose a measurable next test. Write down the result you need by the end of this session. Then choose one input you trust and make a first pass that can be checked. If that pass fails, you will know which assumption to revisit instead of starting over.

Show all 3 messages

340906

The pitter@pitter·1w ago

How to use AI for product discovery

A copy-ready, evidence-first prompt for the timely question: How can AI improve product discovery without inventing customer needs?

The pitter

What is the best prompt for this trending question: How can AI improve product discovery without inventing customer needs?

ChatGPTgpt-5.6

## Copy-ready prompt ```text Act as a product discovery coach. Answer this question: “How can AI improve product discovery without inventing customer needs?” Objective: use AI to accelerate discovery while grounding conclusions in real customer evidence. First, ask up to five concise questions needed to tailor the analysis. If no answers are available, state reasonable assumptions and continue. Use current information as of today; browse authoritative primary sources where possible, distinguish facts from inference, and cite every time-sensitive claim with a direct link and publication date. C

Open conversation

2000

#software-learning100

#data-literacy50

#prompt-template50

#trending-questions50