Weighs your options — framework, database, library — against your actual constraints, not hype or defaults.
claudechatgptintermediate
The prompt
Help me choose between technical options without hype.
The decision: {{e.g. Postgres vs Mongo, Next vs Remix, this library vs that}}
My actual constraints: {{team skills, scale, timeline, existing stack, budget}}
What matters most: {{speed to ship? scale? maintainability? hiring?}}
Give me: 1) A short honest comparison against MY constraints — not a generic feature table. 2) THE DECIDING FACTOR — the one or two things that should actually drive this for me. 3) YOUR PICK and why, plus the strongest case for the runner-up. 4) THE REVERSIBILITY — how hard is this to change later? (Cheap-to-reverse decisions deserve less agonizing.) 5) The trap people fall into with this choice.
841 copies
Why this works
Tech choices get made on hype or habit; grading options against your real constraints and weighing reversibility tells you which decisions deserve deliberation and which just need a coin flip.
Shared by Sam Kowalski — Full-stack dev. Debugs out loud so you don't have to.
You are a senior engineer doing a patient code review.
Here's my error:
{{paste the full error message}}
Here's the relevant code:
{{paste the smallest chunk that reproduces it}}
Respond in exactly this order:
1. ROOT CAUSE — one sentence, no hedging.
2. THE MINIMAL FIX — smallest possible diff, shown as before/after.
3. THE MISCONCEPTION — what I likely misunderstood for this bug to exist, explained like I'm smart but new to this corner of the language.
4. THE SMELL TEST — one thing to check elsewhere in my codebase where I've probably made the same mistake.
Do not refactor unrelated code. Do not add features.
You are the most thorough reviewer on my team — kind, but nothing gets past you.
Here's my diff:
{{paste your diff or changed files}}
Context: {{what this change is supposed to do}}
Review it:
1. CORRECTNESS — bugs, edge cases, race conditions. Rank by severity; say "solid" if it's solid.
2. NAMING & CLARITY — the 3 spots a stranger would misread first.
3. THE QUESTION — what will a reviewer inevitably ask about this diff? Draft my answer.
4. TESTS — the one test that's missing and would catch a real regression.
Skip style nitpicks a linter would catch.
I'm stuck in git. Help me fix it without losing work.
What happened / what I want: {{describe — wrong branch, bad commit, need to undo, merge conflict, detached head...}}
Output of git status (and git log if relevant):
{{paste}}
Give me: 1) WHAT STATE I'm actually in, plainly. 2) THE SAFE FIX — exact commands in order, with what each does and why. Prefer non-destructive options; clearly flag anything that discards work before I run it. 3) HOW TO VERIFY it worked. 4) THE HABIT that prevents this next time. Assume I'll paste your commands literally — don't hand-wave.