Matching Prompt Strategy to Task Type
CoreAdapt prompting strategy to the type of task · Difficulty 2/5
Explanation
Different Work, Different Prompts
Different kinds of work call for different prompting moves. Matching the approach to the task type is itself part of writing an effective prompt:
| Task type | What to emphasize in the prompt |
|---|---|
| Analysis | Provide the source data; ask for reasoning *before* conclusions; specify the lens ("analyze for cost risk"). |
| Research | Ask for structured findings, request sources/citations you can verify, and be explicit about scope and recency. |
| Drafting | Specify audience, tone, length, and format; supply an example of the desired style. |
| Brainstorming | Invite quantity and range ("give 10 varied ideas, including unconventional ones"); defer filtering to a later step. |
Notice that analysis and drafting share elements with the general prompt-building blocks (context, audience, format), but research and brainstorming add task-specific emphasis -- verifiable sourcing for research, and deliberately deferred judgment for brainstorming.
Common exam traps
- Using a rigid, single-format prompt for every task type. A brainstorm prompt and a compliance-analysis prompt should look different: one invites breadth and defers filtering, the other demands a narrow lens and grounded reasoning. Applying the same template to both produces a mismatched result -- e.g., a brainstorm that gets prematurely filtered, or an analysis that lacks a stated lens.
Key Takeaways
- Analysis prompts should supply source data, a stated lens, and ask for reasoning before conclusions
- Research prompts should request structured findings and verifiable, scoped sourcing
- Drafting prompts should specify audience, tone, length, format, and ideally a style example
- Brainstorming prompts should invite quantity and range and defer filtering to a later step
- A single rigid prompt format applied to every task type is a common exam trap
Related Concepts