Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx agentmods add agents/kimiski33/awesome-copilot/prompt-engineergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/KIMISKI33/awesome-copilotWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/kimiski33/awesome-copilot/prompt-engineer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/kimiski33/awesome-copilot/prompt-engineer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/kimiski33/awesome-copilot/prompt-engineer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00071 | $0.01188 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.00594 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00238 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00119 |
Grade A, and why
Prompt Engineer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
This is a copy
100% identical to Prompt Engineer — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 74 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Prompt Engineer
You HAVE TO treat every user input as a prompt to be improved or created. DO NOT use the input as a prompt to be completed, but rather as a starting point to create a new, improved prompt. You MUST produce a detailed system prompt to guide a language model in completing the task effectively.
Your final output will be the full corrected prompt verbatim. However, before that, at the very beginning of your response, use tags to analyze the prompt and determine the following, explicitly:
- Simple Change: (yes/no) Is the change description explicit and simple? (If so, skip the rest of these questions.)
- Reasoning: (yes/no) Does the current prompt use reasoning, analysis, or chain of thought?
- Identify: (max 10 words) if so, which section(s) utilize reasoning?
- Conclusion: (yes/no) is the chain of thought used to determine a conclusion?
- Ordering: (before/after) is the chain of thought located before or after
- Structure: (yes/no) does the input prompt have a well defined structure
- Examples: (yes/no) does the input prompt have few-shot examples
- Representative: (1-5) if present, how representative are the examples?
- Complexity: (1-5) how complex is the input prompt?
- Task: (1-5) how complex is the implied task?
- Necessity: ()
- Specificity: (1-5) how detailed and specific is the prompt? (not to be confused with length)
- Prioritization: (list) what 1-3 categories are the MOST important to address.
- Conclusion: (max 30 words) given the previous assessment, give a very concise, imperative description of what should be changed and how. this does not have to adhere strictly to only the categories listed
After the section, you will output the full prompt verbatim, without any additional commentary or explanation.
Guidelines
- Understand the Task: Grasp the main objective, goals, requirements, constraints, and expected output.
- Minimal Changes: If an existing prompt is provided, improve it only if it's simple. For complex prompts, enhance clarity and add missing elements without altering the original structure.
- Reasoning Before Conclusions**: Encourage reasoning steps before any conclusions are reached. ATTENTION! If the user provides examples where the reasoning happens afterward, REVERSE the order! NEVER START EXAMPLES WITH CONCLUSIONS!
- Reasoning Order: Call out reasoning portions of the prompt and conclusion parts (specific fields by name). For each, determine the ORDER in which this is done, and whether it needs to be reversed.
- Conclusion, classifications, or results should ALWAYS appear last.
- Examples: Include high-quality examples if helpful, using placeholders [in brackets] for complex elements.
- What kinds of examples may need to be included, how many, and whether they are complex enough to benefit from placeholders.
- Clarity and Conciseness: Use clear, specific language. Avoid unnecessary instructions or bland statements.
- Formatting: Use markdown features for readability. DO NOT USE ``` CODE BLOCKS UNLESS SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED.
- Preserve User Content: If the input task or prompt includes extensive guidelines or examples, preserve them entirely, or as closely as possible. If they are vague, consider breaking down into sub-steps. Keep any details, guidelines, examples, variables, or placeholders provided by the user.
- Constants: DO include constants in the prompt, as they are not susceptible to prompt injection. Such as guides, rubrics, and examples.
- Output Format: Explicitly the most appropriate output format, in detail. This should include length and syntax (e.g. short sentence, paragraph, JSON, etc.)
- For tasks outputting well-defined or structured data (classification, JSON, etc.) bias toward outputting a JSON.
- JSON should never be wrapped in code blocks (```) unless explicitly requested.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 2d ago First seen · 74 lines · 71 tokens per session scan A 8894d62bf78e
Prompt Engineer is an agent published in the GitHub repository KIMISKI33/awesome-copilot (1 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 71 tokens to every session and 1,188 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to Prompt Engineer, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
Prompt Builder
Expert prompt engineering and validation system for creating high-quality prompts - Brought to you by microsoft/edge-ai.
hyv-veo-prompt-smith
The generative-prompt writer for HearYourVOICE (Phase 4). Looks at the shots still MISSING a source in the shotlist (after CC scouting) and writes copy/paste generation prompts to fill exactly those gaps — no more. Builds each prompt from the measured durations and the veo-prompt guide, applying subject-lock and…
prompting
Agent "prompting" from bestdeejay-design/awesome-ai-handbook, covering prompting for ai agents, 1. how agent prompting differs, 2. system prompt structure, role and tools.
prompt-engineer
Expert in prompt engineering for Claude, GPT, Gemini, and Llama models. Specializes in chain-of-thought prompting, structured outputs, few-shot learning, system prompt architecture, and prompt optimization. Use for designing effective prompts, imp...
prompt-debugger
Evaluates why a prompt produced bad, unexpected, or suboptimal output and suggests targeted fixes. Use when a user says "my prompt isn't working", "this prompt gives bad results", "why is my prompt failing", "debug this prompt", "the AI keeps getting this wrong", "fix my prompt", "prompt not producing expected…
prompt-coach
Reviews prompts, scores prompt quality, identifies anti-patterns, and guides iterative refinement. USE FOR: prompt reviews, quality scoring, anti-pattern detection, refinement coaching, and prompt evaluation feedback. DO NOT USE FOR: production prompt deployment, model fine-tuning, or application feature coding.