Talk through your plan; get the flaws, the simpler path, and the edge cases surfaced before you write code.
claudechatgptintermediate
The prompt
Be my rubber duck. I'm about to build something — poke holes before I waste a day.
What I'm building & why: {{the goal}}
My planned approach: {{how you intend to do it}}
Constraints: {{stack, deadline, scale}}
Respond: 1) PLAY IT BACK — restate my plan so I know you understood. 2) THE FLAWS — where this breaks, gets slow, or gets painful to maintain. Rank by likelihood. 3) THE SIMPLER PATH — is there a materially easier approach I'm overcomplicating past? 4) THE EDGE CASES I haven't mentioned. 5) THE FIRST STEP if the plan holds. Push back honestly — don't just validate me.
1,287 copies
Why this works
The costliest bugs are architectural and invisible until you've built the wrong thing; a skeptical playback before you type surfaces the simpler path while changing course is still free.
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.