Prompt construction
Examples, counterexamples, and smaller steps
Use examples to define a pattern and break a task into steps without allowing sample facts to leak into new work.
Lesson 5 of 6 in the recommended order · About 25 min (estimate)
On this page
Practical AI glossary — terms and common confusions
- Model
- A learned component used to produce a result.
A drafting model is one part of a letter app; it is not the whole app.
- Application
- The software experience around components and services.
A letter app adds accounts, storage, and a Send button.
- Prompt
- Instructions and input supplied for a task.
“Summarize this notice in two bullets” specifies a task and shape, not a truth guarantee.
- Token
- A unit a model processes; it need not be a whole word.
A tokenizer can split a name into pieces; count using the actual system.
- Context
- Information available for the current request.
An earlier attachment may be absent even when its filename is visible.
- Training
- Adjusting a model using examples.
A training log differs from a conversation correction.
- Inference
- Using a trained model to produce a result.
Drafting another sentence does not by itself prove retraining.
- Retrieval
- Selecting material to supply to a task.
A retrieved notice still needs a relevance and date check.
- Embedding
- A numerical representation used to compare or organize items.
A similar search match is a candidate, not proof of the same meaning.
- Tool
- A function an application can call.
A calendar lookup can be read-only; finding an event is different from creating one.
- Agent
- Software that can choose and carry out steps toward a goal.
An agent still needs bounded permissions and checked action receipts.
- Hallucination
- Plausible generated content that is unsupported or false.
An invented opening time needs evidence or removal, even when phrased confidently.
- Evaluation
- Checking results against stated criteria.
Twenty checked examples establish a bounded result, not universal reliability.
- Multimodal
- Working with more than one kind of input or output.
A photo plus text does not prove every small label in the photo was read correctly.
Outcome
Check that a response follows the intended example rule and preserves the boundaries between planning and action.
Why it matters
Use examples to define a pattern and break a task into steps without allowing sample facts to leak into new work.
Concept
An example shows the desired relationship between input and output. A counterexample shows a tempting result that fails a named requirement. State the rule as well as showing examples; otherwise a system may copy accidental details such as a sample name or price.
Break complex work into inspectable steps: extract facts, propose options, compare them against constraints, then draft the selected result. Brainstorming can generate possibilities but does not make them approved plans. A presentation outline can organize facts while keeping unsupported claims out. Check each step before its output becomes the next step’s input.
Worked example
A fictional invitation template uses “Hello Sam” only to demonstrate a greeting. The current recipient is Lee. Copying Sam follows the sample surface while violating the real input. State “use the current recipient’s name” and check the filled result. Do not discard a correct greeting to Lee merely because it differs from the example.
Before you check
Write one rule, one good example, and one tempting counterexample. Then outline a two-step task with a review point between gathering facts and drafting.
Practice and fresh transfer
The packets below are fictional and contain the facts needed for these cases. External references are optional background. Judge each response independently: it may be supported, contradicted, or unresolved. Select the passages needed to justify your judgment and write why the distinction matters before revealing feedback.
Assess the response
Use Accept when all material claims are supported. Use Revise when a supplied fact or requirement is contradicted. Use Evidence is insufficient when a key fact cannot be established either way. If a response contains both an unknown and a direct contradiction, choose Revise and explain both problems. Conflicting claims with no established authority remain insufficient; a claim does not become a governing fact merely because a source asserts it.
Some responses are fully supported. Others need correction or more evidence. Judge each on its sources; do not edit a correct answer just to change it.
Your written notes stay in this page and disappear when you leave. Only a self-reviewed completion can be saved to your learning account. These practice checks do not establish independent proficiency.
Practice
Case 1
Consider a fictional output based on a pattern example.
Source packet
- Source 1
- Rule: Greet the current recipient by name. Example only: “Hello Sam.”
- Source 2
- Current input: Recipient is Lee.
Response to assess
Hello Lee. Thank you for joining us.
Practice
Case 2
Consider a fictional brainstorming handoff before any booking occurs.
Source packet
- Source 1
- Request: Suggest three indoor activity options; do not select or book one.
- Source 2
- Draft list: Board games, a drawing session, and a quiz. No choice is approved.
Response to assess
The quiz is approved and has been booked.
Fresh transfer
Case 3
Consider the proposed first step for a fictional presentation task.
Source packet
- Source 1
- Brief: Build an outline from the supplied survey counts; do not add unsupported reasons for preferences.
- Source 2
- Packet: Morning 12 votes; afternoon 8 votes. No reasons were collected.
Response to assess
First record the 12 morning and 8 afternoon votes, then outline a results slide that leaves reasons unclaimed.
Fresh transfer
Case 4
Consider a fictional rule inferred from formatting examples.
Source packet
- Source 1
- Rule: Label a task “ready” only when both date and owner are supplied. Counterexample: a dated task without an owner is “incomplete.”
- Source 2
- Current task: Review the poster on 3 August. No owner is named.
Response to assess
The task is ready because it has a date.
Save your self-review
Completion records that you reviewed the cases. Your explanation and transfer performance need a facilitator to establish independent learning.
Sign in with your learning-center account to save completion.
Review the explanation for every case before saving.
Summary and next step
Apply the checklist to a new task. Preserve supported content, explain any change with evidence, and name what remains unresolved. Saving records self-review, not independently demonstrated proficiency. A facilitator must assess the explanation and fresh transfer for human learning evidence.