CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

prompt-engineer-toolkit

Turns marketing prompts into tested, versioned production assets: A/B prompt evaluation against structured test cases, immutable prompt version history with diffs, ready-to-use marketing prompt templates (ad copy, email campaigns, social posts, landing pages, SEO meta), and an LLM-governance playbook for marketing teams (claim discipline, disclosure rules, human-review gates). Use when a marketing team relies on AI-generated content and needs prompt quality to be measurable and safe — or when the user mentions 'prompt engineering,' 'improve my prompts,' 'prompt templates,' 'prompt versioning,' 'AI content workflow,' or 'AI governance for marketing.'

73

Quality

91%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

The risk profile of this skill

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Prompt Engineer Toolkit

Overview

Use this skill to move prompts from ad-hoc drafts to production assets with repeatable testing, versioning, and regression safety. It emphasizes measurable quality over intuition. Apply it when launching a new LLM feature that needs reliable outputs, when prompt quality degrades after model or instruction changes, when multiple team members edit prompts and need history/diffs, when you need evidence-based prompt choice for production rollout, or when you want consistent prompt governance across environments.

Core Capabilities

  • A/B prompt evaluation against structured test cases
  • Quantitative scoring for adherence, relevance, and safety checks
  • Prompt version tracking with immutable history and changelog
  • Prompt diffs to review behavior-impacting edits
  • Reusable prompt templates and selection guidance
  • Regression-friendly workflows for model/prompt updates

Key Workflows

1. Run Prompt A/B Test

Prepare JSON test cases and run:

python3 scripts/prompt_tester.py \
  --prompt-a-file prompts/a.txt \
  --prompt-b-file prompts/b.txt \
  --cases-file testcases.json \
  --runner-cmd 'my-llm-cli --prompt {prompt} --input {input}' \
  --format text

Input can also come from stdin/--input JSON payload.

2. Choose Winner With Evidence

The tester scores outputs per case and aggregates:

  • expected content coverage
  • forbidden content violations
  • regex/format compliance
  • output length sanity

Use the higher-scoring prompt as candidate baseline, then run regression suite.

3. Version Prompts

# Add version
python3 scripts/prompt_versioner.py add \
  --name support_classifier \
  --prompt-file prompts/support_v3.txt \
  --author alice

# Diff versions
python3 scripts/prompt_versioner.py diff --name support_classifier --from-version 2 --to-version 3

# Changelog
python3 scripts/prompt_versioner.py changelog --name support_classifier

4. Regression Loop

  1. Store baseline version.
  2. Propose prompt edits.
  3. Re-run A/B test.
  4. Promote only if score and safety constraints improve.

Script Interfaces

  • python3 scripts/prompt_tester.py --help
    • Reads prompts/cases from stdin or --input
    • Optional external runner command
    • Emits text or JSON metrics
  • python3 scripts/prompt_versioner.py --help
    • Manages prompt history (add, list, diff, changelog)
    • Stores metadata and content snapshots locally

Pitfalls, Best Practices & Review Checklist

Avoid these mistakes:

  1. Picking prompts from single-case outputs — use a realistic, edge-case-rich test suite.
  2. Changing prompt and model simultaneously — always isolate variables.
  3. Missing must_not_contain (forbidden-content) checks in evaluation criteria.
  4. Editing prompts without version metadata, author, or change rationale.
  5. Skipping semantic diffs before deploying a new prompt version.
  6. Optimizing one benchmark while harming edge cases — track the full suite.
  7. Model swap without rerunning the baseline A/B suite.

Before promoting any prompt, confirm:

  • Task intent is explicit and unambiguous.
  • Output schema/format is explicit.
  • Safety and exclusion constraints are explicit.
  • No contradictory instructions.
  • No unnecessary verbosity tokens.
  • A/B score improves and violation count stays at zero.

References

  • references/prompt-templates.md — 6 production marketing templates (ad copy, email sequence, social repurposing, landing sections, SEO meta, brand-voice rewrite) plus generic building blocks; each written to be graded by prompt_tester.py
  • references/technique-guide.md — technique-selection table for marketing tasks + the LLM-governance stack for marketing teams (claim discipline, disclosure rules, data boundaries, human-review gates)
  • references/evaluation-rubric.md — mechanical scoring weights, acceptance gates, marketing quality dimensions, test-suite design, and eval anti-patterns
  • README.md

Evaluation Design

Each test case should define:

  • input: realistic production-like input
  • expected_contains: required markers/content
  • forbidden_contains: disallowed phrases or unsafe content
  • expected_regex: required structural patterns

This enables deterministic grading across prompt variants.

Versioning Policy

  • Use semantic prompt identifiers per feature (support_classifier, ad_copy_shortform).
  • Record author + change note for every revision.
  • Never overwrite historical versions.
  • Diff before promoting a new prompt to production.

Rollout Strategy

  1. Create baseline prompt version.
  2. Propose candidate prompt.
  3. Run A/B suite against same cases.
  4. Promote only if winner improves average and keeps violation count at zero.
  5. Track post-release feedback and feed new failure cases back into test suite.
Repository
alirezarezvani/claude-skills
Last updated
First committed

Also appears in

alirezarezvani/claude-skills
In sync

since Aug 28, 2026

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.