PROMPT RUBRIC
> Last audited against this rubric on 2026-07-02 (all 106 library prompts). # Research Atlas Prompt Quality Rubric (v1) Every library prompt is scored pass/fail on eight criteria. A prompt's quality status derives from the audit outcome. ## Criteria 1. **Clear task** — one unambiguous job; the model can act without guessing what "done" means. 2. **Explicit inputs** — every `{{variable}}` in the instructions is declared in `variables[]` with the right type (multiline for drafts/blocks), required flag, and a description; no undeclared or unused variables. 3. **Correct tags** — `stages[]` and `researchTypes[]` actually match what the prompt does (e.g. a figure-caption prompt is `visualization`/`writing`, not `analysis`). 4. **Concrete output format** — the prompt states the structure of the answer (sections, table columns, labels) and it is consistent with the `outputFormat` field. 5. **Verification / citation discipline** — where the prompt touches facts, sources, or literature it must instruct the model to cite what it actually used, mark uncertainty, and never invent references; prompts that could induce fabricated citations without such guardrails fail. 6. **No fake authority** — role-play personas are fine ("act as a careful statistical reviewer"), but fabricated credentials, named venues implying endorsement ("as a Nature editor"), or claims of guaranteed outcomes fail. Venue-specific framing must be labeled generic ("top-tier venue") or tagged. 7. **English clarity** — idiomatic, translation artifacts removed (curly-quote scare quotes, ● bullets, "please conduct a comprehensive..." filler), consistent terminology, concise. 8. **Reusable** — works across disciplines or is explicitly tagged/labeled for its niche; no hidden assumptions about one language, country, or venue. ## Status mapping - **reviewed** — passes all eight criteria after audit (possibly with in-place fixes). - **unverified** — imported content not yet audited (default for new imports). - **needs_refresh** — audit found problems that could not be safely fixed in place (needs a rewrite, retest, or source refresh); listed honestly in the UI. - **verified** — reviewed AND exercised against a live model with acceptable output (reserved; applied per-prompt when actually tested). ## Fix policy Safe in-place fixes (allowed during audit): variable declarations, tags, output-format statements, English clarity edits, guardrail sentences, honest persona rewording. Unsafe (mark needs_refresh instead): changing the prompt's core method or claims, anything that would need re-testing to trust.
fill the variables
This prompt has 1 variable. Pro fills them into a ready-to-paste prompt for you — no manual find-and-replace.
{{variable}
Unlock with Pro →when to use it
Community prompt sourced from the open-source GitHub repo ResearchAtlas/Research-Atlas (MIT). A "PROMPT RUBRIC" style prompt — adapt the placeholders and specifics to your task. Imported as-is and not independently retested here, so check the output before relying on it.
tags
productivitycommunitydeveloper
source
ResearchAtlas/Research-Atlas · MIT
more in Productivity
Productivity✓ tested
Summarize a doc into decisions & actions
chief of staff who extracts what to DO, not just what was said
Productivity✓ tested
Draft a reply to a hard email
calm, direct communicator who de-escalates without caving
Productivity✓ tested
Turn a brain-dump into a weekly plan
planning coach who protects your focus, not just your calendar