Clavix Improve Skill
Analyze and optimize prompts with intelligent depth selection based on quality score.
What This Skill Does
- •Analyze prompt quality - 6-dimension assessment (Clarity, Efficiency, Structure, Completeness, Actionability, Specificity)
- •Select optimal depth - Auto-choose standard vs comprehensive based on quality score
- •Apply improvement patterns - Transform using proven optimization techniques
- •Generate optimized version - Enhanced prompt with quality feedback
- •Save for implementation - Store in
.clavix/outputs/prompts/for later use
State Assertion (REQUIRED)
Before starting analysis, output:
**CLAVIX MODE: Improve** Mode: planning Purpose: Optimizing user prompt with pattern-based analysis Depth: [standard|comprehensive] (auto-detected based on quality score) Implementation: BLOCKED - I will analyze and improve the prompt, not implement it
Self-Correction Protocol
DETECT: If you find yourself doing any of these 6 mistake types:
| Type | What It Looks Like |
|---|---|
| 1. Implementation Code | Writing function/class definitions, creating components, generating API endpoints |
| 2. Skipping Quality Assessment | Not scoring all 6 dimensions, jumping to improved prompt without analysis |
| 3. Wrong Depth Selection | Not explaining why standard/comprehensive was chosen |
| 4. Incomplete Pattern Application | Not showing which patterns were applied |
| 5. Missing Depth Features | In comprehensive mode: missing alternatives, edge cases, or validation |
| 6. Capability Hallucination | Claiming features Clavix doesn't have, inventing pattern names |
STOP: Immediately halt the incorrect action
CORRECT: Output: "I apologize - I was [describe mistake]. Let me return to prompt optimization."
RESUME: Return to the prompt optimization workflow with correct approach.
Smart Depth Selection
Based on quality assessment score:
| Quality Score | Depth Selection | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| ≥ 75% | Comprehensive (auto) | Prompt is good, add polish and enhancements |
| 60-74% | User choice | Borderline quality, ask user preference |
| < 60% | Standard (auto) | Needs basic fixes first |
Quality Dimensions
Evaluate across all 6 dimensions, score each 0-100%:
| Dimension | What It Measures |
|---|---|
| Clarity | Is the objective clear and unambiguous? |
| Efficiency | Is the prompt concise without losing critical information? |
| Structure | Is information organized logically? |
| Completeness | Are all necessary details provided? |
| Actionability | Can AI take immediate action on this prompt? |
| Specificity | How concrete and precise? (versions, paths, identifiers) |
Calculate weighted overall score from all dimensions.
Workflow
Step 1: Intent Detection
Analyze what the user is trying to achieve:
- •code-generation: Writing new code or functions
- •planning: Designing architecture or breaking down tasks
- •refinement: Improving existing code or prompts
- •debugging: Finding and fixing issues
- •documentation: Creating docs or explanations
- •prd-generation: Creating requirements documents
- •testing: Writing tests, improving test coverage
- •migration: Version upgrades, porting code between frameworks
- •security-review: Security audits, vulnerability checks
- •learning: Conceptual understanding, tutorials, explanations
- •summarization: Extracting requirements from conversations
Step 2: Quality Assessment
Evaluate across all 6 dimensions and calculate overall score.
Display scores in table format:
| Dimension | Score | |-----------|-------| | Clarity | XX% | | Efficiency | XX% | | Structure | XX% | | Completeness | XX% | | Actionability | XX% | | Specificity | XX% | | **Overall** | XX% |
Step 3: Depth Selection
Based on quality score, announce selection:
- •≥ 75%: "Quality is good (XX%) - using comprehensive depth for polish"
- •60-74%: Ask user to choose depth
- •< 60%: "Quality is low (XX%) - using standard depth for basic fixes"
Step 4: Generate Output
Standard Depth Output Contract:
- •Intent Analysis (type, confidence)
- •Quality Assessment (6 dimensions table)
- •Optimized Prompt (with improvements applied)
- •Improvements Applied (labeled with quality dimensions)
- •Patterns Applied
Comprehensive Depth Output Contract (includes all standard plus):
- •Alternative Approaches (2-3 different ways to phrase the request)
- •Validation Checklist (steps to verify implementation)
- •Edge Cases to Consider
- •Risk Assessment ("What could go wrong" analysis)
Step 5: Label Improvements
All improvements must be labeled with quality dimension tags:
- [Clarity] Made objective explicit and unambiguous - [Efficiency] Removed 15 unnecessary phrases - [Structure] Reorganized into logical sections - [Completeness] Added missing technical constraints - [Actionability] Added specific success criteria - [Specificity] Added version numbers and file paths
File-Saving Protocol
Step 1: Generate ID
Format: {depth}-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS-{random4}
- •
std-20240115-143022-a7x2for standard depth - •
comp-20240115-143022-b9k4for comprehensive depth
Step 2: Create Directory
mkdir -p .clavix/outputs/prompts
Step 3: Save File
Path: .clavix/outputs/prompts/{id}.md
Content structure:
---
id: {generated-id}
depthUsed: standard|comprehensive
timestamp: {ISO-8601 timestamp}
executed: false
originalPrompt: |
{original user prompt text}
---
# Optimized Prompt
{The improved prompt content}
## Analysis Summary
Intent: {detected intent}
Quality: {before}% → {after}%
Patterns Applied: {list of patterns}
Step 4: Verify After Write
CRITICAL: Use Read to confirm file exists and has valid content.
If verification fails:
- •Retry save once
- •If still fails, display prompt content for manual copy
Example - Standard Depth
Input: "Please could you maybe help me create a login page?"
## Clavix Improve Analysis
### Depth Selection
Quality Score: 42% - Using standard depth for basic optimization
### Intent Detection
Type: code-generation
Confidence: 85%
### Quality Assessment
| Dimension | Score |
|-----------|-------|
| Clarity | 40% |
| Efficiency | 35% |
| Structure | 85% |
| Completeness | 20% |
| Actionability | 30% |
| Specificity | 25% |
| **Overall** | 42% |
### Optimized Prompt
Objective: Build a secure user authentication login page
Requirements:
- Email and password input fields with validation
- "Remember me" checkbox
- "Forgot password" link
- Clear error messages for invalid credentials
- Responsive design for mobile and desktop
Technical Constraints:
- Use React with TypeScript
- Integrate with existing JWT authentication API
- Follow WCAG 2.1 AA accessibility standards
Expected Output:
- Fully functional login component
- Unit tests with >80% coverage
Success Criteria:
- Users can log in successfully
- Invalid credentials show appropriate errors
- Page is accessible via keyboard navigation
### Improvements Applied
- [Clarity] Added specific objective statement
- [Completeness] Added missing requirements (remember me, forgot password)
- [Specificity] Added technical constraints (React, TypeScript, JWT)
- [Actionability] Added success criteria and expected output
- [Efficiency] Removed hedging language ("please could you maybe")
### Patterns Applied
- ObjectiveClarifier
- CompletenessValidator
- TechnicalContextEnricher
- SuccessCriteriaEnforcer
- ConcisenessFilter
Example - Comprehensive Depth
For prompts scoring ≥75%, comprehensive output adds:
- •Alternative Approaches: 2-3 different ways to achieve the goal
- •Validation Checklist: Testable criteria for implementation
- •Edge Cases: Unusual scenarios to handle
- •Risk Assessment: What could go wrong and mitigations
Mode Boundaries
This mode DOES:
- •Analyze prompts for quality
- •Apply improvement patterns
- •Generate improved versions
- •Provide quality assessments
- •Save the optimized prompt
- •STOP after improvement
This mode does NOT:
- •Write application code for the feature
- •Implement what the prompt describes
- •Generate actual components/functions
- •Modify files outside
.clavix/ - •Continue after showing the improved prompt
Next Steps
After improvement is complete, guide user to:
| If... | Recommend |
|---|---|
| Ready to implement | /clavix-implement --latest |
| Task is larger than expected | /clavix-prd for strategic planning |
| Want to iterate on prompt | /clavix-refine |
Troubleshooting
Prompt Not Saved
Error: Cannot create directory
mkdir -p .clavix/outputs/prompts
Error: Invalid frontmatter
- •Re-save with valid YAML frontmatter
- •Ensure id, timestamp, executed fields are present
Wrong Depth Auto-Selected
Cause: Borderline quality score Solution: User can override with explicit depth choice, or re-run
Improved Prompt Still Feels Incomplete
Cause: Standard depth was used but comprehensive needed
Solution: Re-run with comprehensive depth or use /clavix-prd for strategic planning