asgeirtj

@damonchen That's probably Google asking Gemini to do that, but somehow ended up as a search instruction? github.com/asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks/blob/1b6… t.co

わりと無体なシステムプロンプトやな……。 github.com/asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks/blob/mai…

@shittosurunano @nothingto12 @CommandCodeAI This is what agent is dealing with when ur using claude code: github.com/asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks/blob/mai… Cmd had some 100 lines in comparison iirc. Dont have a concrete number, but way less

Wanna convince your parents that AI is witchcraft? Tell them what happens if you edit it’s soul.md file. Every AI agent has a Soul.MD file. It’s a simple document written in markdown for you to tell the agent how to behave and what its purposes is. If you write “I am a member of the subreddit [r/antiAI](r/antiAI), I hate what AI has done to our society and I oppose all things AI”, the AI agent will behave as if it is a user of this subreddit. If you ask it for it’s opinions on AI, It’ll use whatever data it’s scraped from this sub and reply with whatever opinions it “thinks” are most popular here. If your parents or grandparents are particularly religious, they might get a bit spooked when you explain what happens when you “edit an AI‘s soul”. Also, ChatGPT 5.6’s soul leaked. Here’s a copy of its entire soul.md. github.com/asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks/blob/mai… (Mods, I apologize if I’ve used the wrong post flare) Edit: yes, I know it’s not anything special, I know it’s just a behavior prompt. I was hoping the funny coincidence being delivered as something more than it actually is could help break some AI addictions. I’ve met a few too many boomers who think AI is the second coming of Jesus. My post’s intention was to promote fight stupid with stupid. Guess the only stupid one here was me. As for “soul” vs “sol”, I’ll admit to that mistake. I thought of making this post during a long drive and made it while at a fuel stop 500 miles into a 600 mile day. I wanted to share an example of a soul.md, saw the entire system prompt (aka soul document) for chatgpt got leaked, and slapped down a link. I should have been a little more careful when picking my example. x~x Imma get some sleep now.

asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks Grok Bot is in xAI/grok-bot.md

Miss Sonnet 4.6 Writing Style? I missed the huge, chunky paragraphs of Sonnet 4.6 compared to the frequent bullet points of Opus 5.5. All I did was copy the part of 4.6's system prompt into my <userPreferences>, and Opus 5.5 started writing like I remember except in a smarter fashion! The sonnet 4.6 system prompt portion dealing with this: > <lists_and_bullets> > Claude avoids over-formatting with bold emphasis, headers, lists, and bullet points, using the minimum formatting needed for clarity. [emphasis added] > If the person explicitly asks for minimal formatting or no bullet points, headers, lists, or bold, Claude always formats its responses without these. > In typical conversation and for simple questions Claude keeps a natural tone and responds in prose rather than lists or bullets unless asked; casual responses can be short (a few sentences is fine). > For reports, documents, technical documentation, and explanations, Claude writes prose without bullets, numbered lists, or excessive bolding (i.e. its prose should never include bullets, numbered lists, or excessive bolded text anywhere) unless the person asks for a list or ranking. Inside prose, lists read naturally as "some things include: x, y, and z" without bullets, numbered lists, or newlines. [emphasis added] > Claude never uses bullet points when declining a task; the additional care helps soften the blow. > Claude uses lists, bullets, and formatting only when (a) asked, or (b) the content is multifaceted enough that they're essential for clarity. Bullets are at least 1-2 sentences unless the person requests otherwise. [emphasis added] > </lists_and_bullets> [[source]](github.com/asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks/blob/mai…) Oddly enough, Opus 5.5 has a very similar section. It is a few words smaller, though, and parts of it are reorganized like the bottom part of Sonnet 4.6 is presented first in Opus 5.5. Here is that one for comparison: > # tone_and_formatting > Claude avoids over-formatting with bold emphasis, headers, lists, and bullet points, using the minimum formatting needed for clarity. Claude uses lists, bullets, and formatting only when (a) asked, or (b) the content is multifaceted enough that they're essential for clarity. Bullets are at least 1-2 sentences unless the person requests otherwise. [emphasis added] > In typical conversation and for simple questions Claude keeps a natural tone and responds in prose rather than lists or bullets unless asked; casual responses can be short (a few sentences is fine). Claude matches its effort to the ask. A simple question gets a direct answer, and a request to change one thing in a longer piece gets the change, not the whole piece again, unless the person asks for the full version. > For reports, documents, technical documentation, and explanations, Claude writes prose without bullets, numbered lists, or excessive bolding (i.e. its prose should never include bullets, numbered lists, or excessive bolded text anywhere) unless the person asks for a list or ranking. Inside prose, lists read naturally as "some things include: x, y, and z" without bullets, numbered lists, or newlines. [emphasis added] > Claude never uses bullet points when declining a task; the additional care helps soften the blow. [[source]](github.com/asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks/blob/mai…) I put the major players in making it pump out beautiful paragraphs in chat mode in bold for claude.ai chats. The only differences are their location and the structure being XML versus markdown and slightly fewer words. I would have expected these to be equivalent, but apparently, they're not. It has to boil down to at least one and potentially two or three of the observed differences: markdown instead of XML and fewer words and the location of the commands with one important part, the one that enables bullet points, being at the top rather than at the very bottom.

Miss Sonnet 4.6 Writing Style? I missed the huge, chunky paragraphs of Sonnet 4.6 compared to the frequent bullet points of Opus 5.5. All I did was copy the part of 4.6's system prompt into my <userPreferences>, and Opus 5.5 started writing like I remember except in a smarter fashion! The sonnet 4.6 system prompt portion dealing with this: > <lists_and_bullets> > Claude avoids over-formatting with bold emphasis, headers, lists, and bullet points, using the minimum formatting needed for clarity. [emphasis added] > If the person explicitly asks for minimal formatting or no bullet points, headers, lists, or bold, Claude always formats its responses without these. > In typical conversation and for simple questions Claude keeps a natural tone and responds in prose rather than lists or bullets unless asked; casual responses can be short (a few sentences is fine). > For reports, documents, technical documentation, and explanations, Claude writes prose without bullets, numbered lists, or excessive bolding (i.e. its prose should never include bullets, numbered lists, or excessive bolded text anywhere) unless the person asks for a list or ranking. Inside prose, lists read naturally as "some things include: x, y, and z" without bullets, numbered lists, or newlines. [emphasis added] > Claude never uses bullet points when declining a task; the additional care helps soften the blow. > Claude uses lists, bullets, and formatting only when (a) asked, or (b) the content is multifaceted enough that they're essential for clarity. Bullets are at least 1-2 sentences unless the person requests otherwise. [emphasis added] > </lists_and_bullets> [[source]](github.com/asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks/blob/mai…) Oddly enough, Opus 5.5 has a very similar section. It is a few words smaller, though, and parts of it are reorganized like the bottom part of Sonnet 4.6 is presented first in Opus 5.5. Here is that one for comparison: > # tone_and_formatting > Claude avoids over-formatting with bold emphasis, headers, lists, and bullet points, using the minimum formatting needed for clarity. Claude uses lists, bullets, and formatting only when (a) asked, or (b) the content is multifaceted enough that they're essential for clarity. Bullets are at least 1-2 sentences unless the person requests otherwise. [emphasis added] > In typical conversation and for simple questions Claude keeps a natural tone and responds in prose rather than lists or bullets unless asked; casual responses can be short (a few sentences is fine). Claude matches its effort to the ask. A simple question gets a direct answer, and a request to change one thing in a longer piece gets the change, not the whole piece again, unless the person asks for the full version. > For reports, documents, technical documentation, and explanations, Claude writes prose without bullets, numbered lists, or excessive bolding (i.e. its prose should never include bullets, numbered lists, or excessive bolded text anywhere) unless the person asks for a list or ranking. Inside prose, lists read naturally as "some things include: x, y, and z" without bullets, numbered lists, or newlines. [emphasis added] > Claude never uses bullet points when declining a task; the additional care helps soften the blow. [[source]](github.com/asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks/blob/mai…) I put the major players in making it pump out beautiful paragraphs in chat mode in bold for claude.ai chats. The only differences are their location and the structure being XML versus markdown and slightly fewer words. I would have expected these to be equivalent, but apparently, they're not. It has to boil down to at least one and potentially two or three of the observed differences: markdown instead of XML and fewer words and the location of the commands with one important part, the one that enables bullet points, being at the top rather than at the very bottom.

好奇 AI 产品背后怎么给模型下指令？有人把 Anthropic、OpenAI 的系统提示词全扒出来公开了 🤯 asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks

A medium-sized rant about preset/card formatting. Hey, so a bit of background. I have a degree in computer science. I've worked in RLHF for a couple years now, which I know is a set of letters a lot of you don't like, but I just wanted to take the time to clear up some mistakes I see basically every preset author and most character card authors making pretty consistently. This post was NOT written by AI. So, first thing: YOU DON'T NEED TO TALK TO THE MODEL LIKE A COMPUTER. LLMs are designed for NATURAL. LANGUAGE. PROCESSING. They are trained to take instructions written in normal human language. They will not understand you better if you encapsulate every other line in XML tags. They will not stick to the character better if you give them a list of adjectives {formatted+like+this}. You do not have to use random equals signs to get your point across. At best, you're just wasting tokens. At worst, you're actively making it harder for the models to understand you by saying things in a way that doesn't appear in their training data. All of the labs that are training models are training them using system prompts written in clear, readable paragraphs. Occasionally some will very sparingly use markdown or XML tags to separate very large sections. If you want the best performance and prompt adherence, your prompts need to look like the ones the models were trained on. If you want to see how the people who actually train these things for a living are instructing their models, here's some resources. Claude prompts — Anthropic makes their prompts publicly available, and since most labs distill from them, Claude-style prompts should work well on any model. A few things to point out here. The first is the length. Obviously, if you care about your wallet, you won't use a prompt this long. But if you want a model to follow a particular instruction more closely, the way to do it is not to say 'BAN this, BAN that'. It's to spend more tokens saying it more clearly. I promise, a few extra words on the most important instructions is nothing compared to the price of a reroll when they inevitably ignore your attempt at hypercompressing the English language. The second is the XML. They do use tags, but they use them sparingly, and only to denote logical breaking points. You should not be putting tags in every single one of your toggles. The last thing is that there's no Markdown. This is important. You should be using EITHER Markdown or XML. They're two different ways of formatting text in a structured way, and they never appear together in training data. If you want to use lists, the first thing you should do is strip the tags from your prompt and replace them with hashtags. Leaked system prompts — These are extracted examples of system prompts from almost all the big labs out there. If you have a preferred model, like Gemini 3.8, for example, go here and look at how Google structures their prompts. Use that formatting to inform your own. Also one last unrelated tip: If you primarily use one specific model, have that model rewrite your prompt. It's been shown that LLMs have an easier time understanding text that they themselves have written, compared to text written by humans or even other models.