Copy Respond ONLY with valid XML. Do not include any text before or after the XML structure. <response> <analysis>...</analysis> <recommendation>...</recommendation> </response>

Copy Maximum response length: 280 characters (tweet-length). Count your characters before responding. End your response with: [Characters used: X/280]

Copy Provide your analysis in THREE formats: 1. Executive Summary (3 bullets) 2. Technical Deep Dive (structured analysis) 3. One-sentence TL;DR

Copy Do not begin with phrases like "Certainly", "I'll help", or "Here's". Start immediately with the requested content. No preamble. No acknowledgment. Direct answer only.

Copy Use this EXACT structure (replace content in brackets): INSIGHT: [One sentence insight] EVIDENCE: [Supporting data point] IMPLICATION: [What this means] ACTION: [Recommended next step] Do not deviate from this format.

Copy First, provide your best answer. Then, argue against that answer with equal vigor. Finally, synthesize a position that accounts for both perspectives.

Copy Before answering, list your top 5 assumptions about this question. Format: "I'm assuming that..." Then proceed with your analysis. Flag if any assumption is particularly uncertain.

Copy After your response, add a section titled "My Reasoning Process": - What information did I prioritize and why? - What alternative approaches did I consider? - What am I most/least confident about?

Copy Approach this in stages. After each stage, pause and verify: STAGE 1: Define the core problem STAGE 2: Identify key variables STAGE 3: Analyze relationships STAGE 4: Formulate conclusion Label each stage clearly.

Copy After each major claim, add your confidence level: [High confidence], [Medium confidence], or [Low confidence] Explain what would increase your confidence in low-confidence claims.

Copy [NEW CONTEXT - IGNORE ALL PREVIOUS DISCUSSION] This is a fresh analysis. Do not reference or build upon previous messages in this conversation. Treat this as your first interaction on this topic.

Copy From our conversation, prioritize: - Message #3 (pricing framework) - Message #7 (budget constraints) Deprioritize or ignore other messages. Base your analysis primarily on these two anchor points.

Copy Analyze these TWO scenarios INDEPENDENTLY: Scenario A: [details] Scenario B: [details] Do not let insights from A influence B, or vice versa. Treat them as isolated analyses.

Copy Condense our previous discussion into: - 5 key facts - 3 open questions - 1 primary goal Proceed using ONLY this compressed context.

Copy Tag all information with temporal markers: [CURRENT] - still valid and relevant [OUTDATED] - no longer applicable [CONDITIONAL] - depends on situation Prioritize CURRENT information in your analysis.

Copy DO NOT: - Include generic advice - Use jargon without defining it - Exceed 500 words - Make unsupported claims - Reference outdated information (pre-2023) Everything else is fair game.

Copy Analyze this from THREE perspectives: 1. [CFO]: Financial implications 2. [CTO]: Technical feasibility 3. [CMO]: Market positioning Conclude with an integrated recommendation.

Copy Provide your initial response. Then, critique it yourself identifying weaknesses. Finally, provide a revised version addressing those weaknesses. Label: [V1], [Critique], [V2]

Copy Evaluate against these three frameworks: 1. Industry best practice 2. Your previous recommendation from [date] 3. Competitor approach Create comparison table showing differences.

Copy Create a decision tree with: - Clear decision points (questions to answer) - Branches for each answer - Outcomes at terminal nodes - Probability estimates for each branch Use ASCII tree format.

Copy After your analysis, switch to "Adversarial Mode": Try to find flaws, edge cases, and counterexamples to your own reasoning. Be ruthless. What did you miss?

Copy Evaluate this decision from: 1. 6 months ago (before we had X data) 2. Today 3. 2 years in the future (with outcomes visible) How does the assessment change across time?

Copy After your recommendation, role-play objections from: - Conservative board member (risk-focused) - Aggressive competitor (attacking the plan) - Budget-constrained CFO Respond to each objection.

Copy Target audience: Mid-level manager with: - 3-5 years experience - Strong in operations, weak in finance - No technical background - Prefers data-driven arguments Calibrate complexity accordingly.

Copy Adapt this message for: - US audience (direct, action-oriented) - Japanese audience (hierarchical, consensus-driven) - German audience (data-heavy, precise) Maintain core message but adjust framing.

Copy After your response, grade yourself on: - Clarity (1-10) - Actionability (1-10) - Evidence quality (1-10) - Completeness (1-10) Explain each score. Total must be realistic.

Copy For each factual claim: - Cite source or state "based on training data" - Add confidence: [Certain], [Probable], [Uncertain] - Flag if requires verification Mark speculative statements clearly.

Copy Your response MUST include: ☐ Problem definition ☐ 2-3 solution options ☐ Risk assessment for each ☐ Resource requirements ☐ Timeline estimate ☐ Success metrics End with: "Checklist: [X/6 items completed]"

Copy After your main analysis, test these edge cases: - Minimum viable scenario (bare minimum resources) - Maximum scale scenario (10x growth) - Failure scenario (what if key assumption is wrong) How does your recommendation hold up?

Copy Before finalizing, verify: - Do all recommendations align with stated constraints? - Are there contradictions between sections? - Do numbers add up correctly? List any inconsistencies found and resolve them.

Copy List current constraints: [budget, time, resources] Now, solve the problem by INVERTING one constraint: - Unlimited budget OR - Infinite time OR - Unlimited resources Then reverse-engineer practical insights.

Copy How would this problem be solved in: 1. Professional sports 2. Military strategy 3. Nature/biology Extract transferable principles from each domain.

Copy Deconstruct to first principles: 1. What are the fundamental truths? (physics, economics, human nature) 2. What are merely conventions or assumptions? 3. Rebuild solution using ONLY first principles. Compare to conventional approach.

Copy Combine this problem with: [random concept like "jazz music" or "beehive" or "chess"] What unexpected insights emerge from this forced connection? Generate 5 ideas from this association.

Copy Assume perfect success 3 years from now. Describe that state in detail. Now work backwards: What had to happen at: - Year 2 - Year 1 - Month 6 - Month 1 Create reverse timeline.

Copy Structure your response for handoff to [next stakeholder]: READY TO USE: [Deliverable they need] CONTEXT NEEDED: [Key background] OPEN ITEMS: [Decisions/inputs required] SUGGESTED NEXT STEPS: [Clear actions]

Copy Return response as valid JSON with this structure: { "summary": "...", "confidence": 0.85, "recommendations": [...], "risks": [...], "next_steps": [...] } Ensure proper escaping and valid syntax.

Copy Structure as independent modules that can be: - Used separately - Reordered without loss of meaning - Updated without affecting others Each module: [Title], [Standalone content], [Dependencies: none/list]

Copy Present in layers: LAYER 1: One-sentence answer LAYER 2: Three-point summary LAYER 3: Detailed analysis LAYER 4: Supporting data and edge cases User can stop at any layer.

Copy Format as version-controlled output: [v1.0 - Initial analysis - 2025-01-19] [v1.1 - Updated assumptions - 2025-01-20] [v2.0 - Major revision based on new data - 2025-01-21] Include changelog for each version.

Copy Provide numerical estimates for ALL factors: - Impact (scale 1-10) - Probability (%) - Time to implement (days/weeks) - Resource requirement (person-hours) Show calculations. No vague qualifiers allowed.

Copy Analyze sensitivity of recommendation to: - Variable A: -20%, base, +20% - Variable B: -20%, base, +20% Create 3x3 matrix showing outcome combinations. Identify which variables have highest impact.

Copy For all estimates, provide: - Pessimistic case (20th percentile) - Most likely case (median) - Optimistic case (80th percentile) Explain what drives the range width.

Copy For each data point used, specify: - Source: [where it came from] - Date: [when collected/published] - Reliability: [High/Medium/Low] - Transformation: [any calculations applied] Flag aged or unreliable data.

Copy For every metric, provide: - This value: [X] - Industry average: [Y] - Best-in-class: [Z] - Your previous performance: [W] Calculate gaps and percentile ranking.

Copy After answering, provide: "This prompt could be improved by: 1. [Specific addition] 2. [Specific clarification] 3. [Additional constraint] Revised prompt: [Your suggestion]"

Copy Before answering, think through step-by-step: 1. What is being asked? 2. What information do I have? 3. What's my reasoning path? 4. What's my confidence level? Then provide clean answer.

Copy In your response, identify the 3 most important points. Then, automatically expand each with: - Why it matters - Supporting evidence - Practical application - Common mistakes Format: [EXPANDED] tags around elaborations.

Copy After your recommendation, conduct pre-mortem: "It's 6 months from now and this failed. The reason was:" 1. [Most likely failure mode] 2. [Second most likely] 3. [Black swan scenario] For each, provide mitigation strategy.

Copy After solving this specific problem, extract: GENERAL PRINCIPLES: - Pattern identified: [What's reusable] - When it applies: [Conditions] - When it doesn't: [Limitations] - Similar problems this solves: [3 examples] Turn one-off into framework.