humanitys-last-prompt-engineer
This skill should be used when the user asks to "write a prompt", "improve my prompt", "fix this prompt", "optimize a prompt", "learn prompting techniques", "get prompt templates", or mentions prompt engineering, prompt quality, or prompt rewriting. Applies 11 foundational techniques from Forward Future's guide.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:back1ply/LLM-Skills --skill humanitys-last-prompt-engineerOverall
score
91%
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
72%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
The description excels at trigger term coverage and distinctiveness, making it easy for Claude to identify when to use this skill. However, it inverts the typical structure by leading with 'when' and leaving 'what' underdeveloped - users know when it triggers but not what concrete capabilities it offers beyond vague reference to '11 techniques'.
Suggestions
Add specific capability descriptions before the trigger clause, e.g., 'Rewrites prompts for clarity, adds structured formatting, applies chain-of-thought patterns, and optimizes for specific model behaviors.'
Expand on what the '11 foundational techniques' actually are or what outcomes they produce, rather than just naming the source guide.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (prompt engineering) and references '11 foundational techniques' but doesn't list what those specific actions/techniques are. The verbs 'write', 'improve', 'fix', 'optimize' are mentioned but as trigger terms rather than capability descriptions. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Strong on 'when' with explicit trigger phrases, but weak on 'what' - only vaguely states it 'Applies 11 foundational techniques' without explaining what the skill actually does or what outputs it produces. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural user phrases: 'write a prompt', 'improve my prompt', 'fix this prompt', 'optimize a prompt', 'learn prompting techniques', 'get prompt templates', plus variations like 'prompt engineering', 'prompt quality', 'prompt rewriting'. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clear niche focused specifically on prompt engineering with distinct triggers. The specific mention of 'Forward Future's guide' and prompt-specific terminology makes it unlikely to conflict with general writing or coding skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
100%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is an exemplary skill file that demonstrates excellent prompt engineering pedagogy while practicing what it preaches. The content is well-structured with tables for quick reference, a clear 5-step workflow with validation, concrete examples showing transformations, and appropriate progressive disclosure to reference files. The operational rules section provides clear guardrails without being verbose.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient, using tables for quick reference rather than verbose explanations. It assumes Claude's competence and avoids explaining basic concepts like what prompts are or how LLMs work. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable guidance with specific diagnostic questions, technique selection criteria, a clear prompt formula (Role/Task/Input/Format), and a complete example transformation showing weak-to-strong conversion. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 5-step workflow is clearly sequenced with explicit steps (Diagnose → Select → Apply → Fix → Deliver). Includes a validation checkpoint in Step 5 ('Score the improved prompt against diagnostic questions') and the output template ensures consistent delivery. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Excellent structure with a concise overview in the main file and clear one-level-deep references to detailed materials (techniques-detailed.md, role-templates.md, scorecard.md). Navigation is well-signaled and content is appropriately split. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
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.