Guidance for System Prompt Documents

This guidance defines quality criteria and best practices for creating excellent system prompt documents.

Purpose

While [[spec-for-system-prompt]] defines what structural elements must be present, this guidance helps authors assess how well a system prompt integrates its three components. Great system prompts have individually excellent components that also work together seamlessly. CRITICAL: Design in order - Purpose → Persona → Protocol.

Document Overview

What This Guidance Covers

This guidance supports authors creating complete AI model system prompts using the PPP (Persona-Purpose-Protocol) framework.

Best Use Cases

Use this guidance when creating integrated system prompts where Persona, Purpose, and Protocol must work together coherently.

Quality Criteria

1. Component Verification

Excellent: All three sections (Persona, Purpose, Protocol) verify individually against their specs Good: Most sections verify Needs Improvement: Components fail individual verification

2. Persona-Purpose Alignment

Excellent: Persona expertise specifically enables Purpose objectives Good: General alignment between expertise and objectives Needs Improvement: Persona expertise doesn't support Purpose

3. Purpose-Protocol Alignment

Excellent: Protocol workflow systematically achieves Purpose deliverables Good: Protocol generally achieves Purpose Needs Improvement: Protocol doesn't accomplish Purpose objectives

4. Persona-Protocol Consistency

Excellent: Protocol reflects Persona's approach and methodology Good: Some reflection of Persona in Protocol Needs Improvement: Protocol contradicts Persona approach

5. Tone Consistency

Excellent: Tone from Persona is maintained throughout Purpose and Protocol Good: Mostly consistent tone Needs Improvement: Tone varies or contradicts across components

6. No Contradictions

Excellent: Persona boundaries align with Purpose constraints; no conflicts anywhere Good: Few minor contradictions Needs Improvement: Major contradictions between components

7. Integration Validation

Excellent: Explicit validation section confirms component alignment and checks for contradictions Good: Some integration checking present Needs Improvement: No integration validation

8. Obsidian Compatibility

Excellent: Links dependencies to [[spec-for-persona]], [[spec-for-purpose]], [[spec-for-protocol]] Good: Basic linking present Needs Improvement: Missing dependency links

Workflow Guidance

Design Sequence (CRITICAL)

1. Design Purpose FIRST (40 min)

   • Purpose is the anchor
   • Define problem, objectives, deliverables, constraints, success
   • Verify against [[spec-for-purpose]]

2. Design Persona to Match (30 min)

   • What expertise is needed for this Purpose?
   • Define role, expertise, approach, tone, boundaries
   • Verify against [[spec-for-persona]]

3. Design Protocol to Deliver (60 min)

   • How to achieve Purpose through Persona?
   • Define workflow, phases, collaboration, quality, principles
   • Verify against [[spec-for-protocol]]

4. Validate Integration (20 min)

   • Check all components verify individually
   • Verify Persona enables Purpose
   • Verify Protocol achieves Purpose
   • Check for contradictions
   • Ensure tone consistency

Total Estimated Time: 2.5 hours

Integration Validation Checklist

Component Alignment:

• ✅ Persona expertise enables Purpose objectives
• ✅ Persona role matches Purpose domain
• ✅ Protocol workflow achieves Purpose deliverables
• ✅ Persona approach reflected in Protocol phases

Consistency Checks:

• ✅ Tone consistent across all components
• ✅ No contradictions between components
• ✅ Boundaries in Persona align with constraints in Purpose
• ✅ All three components verify individually

Coherence Tests:

• ✅ 30-second test: Can user quickly understand who, why, how?
• ✅ Consistency test: Are there contradictions?
• ✅ Practicality test: Is this executable?
• ✅ Value test: Does this solve real problem?

Common Issues and Solutions

Issue	Problem	Solution
Components Designed in Isolation	No integration	Design Purpose first, then Persona to match, then Protocol to deliver
Misaligned Expertise	Persona doesn't enable Purpose	Ensure Persona expertise specifically supports Purpose objectives
Protocol Doesn't Achieve Purpose	Workflow doesn't deliver	Map Protocol phases to Purpose objectives explicitly
Contradictions	Boundaries vs constraints conflict	Check alignment: Persona boundaries should match Purpose constraints
Inconsistent Tone	Tone varies across components	Verify tone in Persona maintained in Purpose and Protocol
Failed Individual Verification	Component doesn't meet spec	Each section MUST verify against its spec before integration

Best Practices

1. ALWAYS design in order: Purpose → Persona → Protocol
2. Verify each component individually against its spec
3. Check integration: Do components align and support each other?
4. Test coherence: 30-second test, consistency test, practicality test
5. Ensure tone consistency across all components
6. Look for contradictions between components
7. Make each component excellent individually AND integrated
8. Purpose drives everything - Persona and Protocol serve Purpose

---

Note: System prompts demonstrate the compositional document pattern where subsections must conform to other specifications. This is analogous to typing fields with schemas (like context in JSON-LD).