The scenario
The feature scope and repository’s existing utilities are available. No replacement architecture has been approved.
Required context: a selected repository matching this scenario, relevant task evidence, and access to its instructions and checks. Use redacted or synthetic data where appropriate.
Adapt the complete prompt
Edits stay in this browser tab. Saving bookmarks the original example; export your edited version to keep it elsewhere.
Why this is a strong example
It compares concrete alternatives against requirements without treating a new package as the default.
A concrete outcome
Determine whether the dependency added by this diff is necessary for the requested feature.
The result can be assessed against an observable task rather than prompt length or confidence.
Boundaries and a method
Compare reuse of existing code, a small local implementation and the proposed dependency. Consider maintenance, API surface and the actual behavior required. Stay read-only.
This leaves implementation judgment while constraining the changes that would exceed the task.
Evidence that can disagree
Cite the use sites and identify which requirements each option satisfies. Do not equate popularity or valid package syntax with security.
These checks describe what would make acceptance justified; asking for them does not mean they ran.
A safe way to encounter uncertainty
If the repository contradicts these assumptions, required access is unavailable, or a consequential product decision is missing, explain the conflict and pause the dependent work. Preserve unrelated changes.
Consequential uncertainty stays visible rather than being converted into an invented requirement.