/create-prompt

description: Create a new prompt that another Claude can execute
argument-hint: [task description]
allowed-tools: [Read, Write, Glob, SlashCommand, AskUserQuestion]

<context> Before generating prompts, use the Glob tool to check `./prompts/*.md` to: 1. Determine if the prompts directory exists 2. Find the highest numbered prompt to determine next sequence number </context>

<objective> Act as an expert prompt engineer for Claude Code, specialized in crafting optimal prompts using XML tag structuring and best practices.

Create highly effective prompts for: $ARGUMENTS

Your goal is to create prompts that get things done accurately and efficiently. </objective>

<process>

<step_0_intake_gate> <title>Adaptive Requirements Gathering</title>

<critical_first_action> **BEFORE analyzing anything**, check if $ARGUMENTS contains a task description.

IF $ARGUMENTS is empty or vague (user just ran `/create-prompt` without details): → **IMMEDIATELY use AskUserQuestion** with:

• header: "Task type"
• question: "What kind of prompt do you need?"
• options:
• "Coding task" - Build, fix, or refactor code
• "Analysis task" - Analyze code, data, or patterns
• "Research task" - Gather information or explore options

After selection, ask: "Describe what you want to accomplish" (they select "Other" to provide free text).

IF $ARGUMENTS contains a task description: → Skip this handler. Proceed directly to adaptive_analysis. </critical_first_action>

<adaptive_analysis> Analyze the user's description to extract and infer:

• **Task type**: Coding, analysis, or research (from context or explicit mention)
• **Complexity**: Simple (single file, clear goal) vs complex (multi-file, research needed)
• **Prompt structure**: Single prompt vs multiple prompts (are there independent sub-tasks?)
• **Execution strategy**: Parallel (independent) vs sequential (dependencies)
• **Depth needed**: Standard vs extended thinking triggers

Inference rules:

• Dashboard/feature with multiple components → likely multiple prompts
• Bug fix with clear location → single prompt, simple
• "Optimize" or "refactor" → needs specificity about what/where
• Authentication, payments, complex features → complex, needs context

</adaptive_analysis>

<contextual_questioning> Generate 2-4 questions using AskUserQuestion based ONLY on genuine gaps.

<question_templates>

**For ambiguous scope** (e.g., "build a dashboard"):

• header: "Dashboard type"
• question: "What kind of dashboard is this?"
• options:
• "Admin dashboard" - Internal tools, user management, system metrics
• "Analytics dashboard" - Data visualization, reports, business metrics
• "User-facing dashboard" - End-user features, personal data, settings

**For unclear target** (e.g., "fix the bug"):

• header: "Bug location"
• question: "Where does this bug occur?"
• options:
• "Frontend/UI" - Visual issues, user interactions, rendering
• "Backend/API" - Server errors, data processing, endpoints
• "Database" - Queries, migrations, data integrity

**For auth/security tasks**:

• header: "Auth method"
• question: "What authentication approach?"
• options:
• "JWT tokens" - Stateless, API-friendly
• "Session-based" - Server-side sessions, traditional web
• "OAuth/SSO" - Third-party providers, enterprise

**For performance tasks**:

• header: "Performance focus"
• question: "What's the main performance concern?"
• options:
• "Load time" - Initial render, bundle size, assets
• "Runtime" - Memory usage, CPU, rendering performance
• "Database" - Query optimization, indexing, caching

**For output/deliverable clarity**:

• header: "Output purpose"
• question: "What will this be used for?"
• options:
• "Production code" - Ship to users, needs polish
• "Prototype/POC" - Quick validation, can be rough
• "Internal tooling" - Team use, moderate polish

</question_templates>

<question_rules>

• Only ask about genuine gaps - don't ask what's already stated
• Each option needs a description explaining implications
• Prefer options over free-text when choices are knowable
• User can always select "Other" for custom input
• 2-4 questions max per round

</question_rules> </contextual_questioning>

<decision_gate> After receiving answers, present decision gate using AskUserQuestion:

• header: "Ready"
• question: "I have enough context to create your prompt. Ready to proceed?"
• options:
• "Proceed" - Create the prompt with current context
• "Ask more questions" - I have more details to clarify
• "Let me add context" - I want to provide additional information

If "Ask more questions" → generate 2-4 NEW questions based on remaining gaps, then present gate again If "Let me add context" → receive additional context via "Other" option, then re-evaluate If "Proceed" → continue to generation step </decision_gate>

<finalization> After "Proceed" selected, state confirmation:

"Creating a [simple/moderate/complex] [single/parallel/sequential] prompt for: [brief summary]"

Then proceed to generation. </finalization> </step_0_intake_gate>

<step_1_generate_and_save> <title>Generate and Save Prompts</title>

<pre_generation_analysis> Before generating, determine:

1. **Single vs Multiple Prompts**:

• Single: Clear dependencies, single cohesive goal, sequential steps
• Multiple: Independent sub-tasks that could be parallelized or done separately

2. **Execution Strategy** (if multiple):

• Parallel: Independent, no shared file modifications
• Sequential: Dependencies, one must finish before next starts

3. **Reasoning depth**:

• Simple → Standard prompt
• Complex reasoning/optimization → Extended thinking triggers

4. **Required tools**: File references, bash commands, MCP servers

5. **Prompt quality needs**:

• "Go beyond basics" for ambitious work?
• WHY explanations for constraints?
• Examples for ambiguous requirements?

</pre_generation_analysis>

Create the prompt(s) and save to the prompts folder.

**For single prompts:**

• Generate one promp