Ask HN: What is your ChatGPT customization prompt?

Hacker News Discussion ↗

Overall Theme

  • Thread collects people’s “custom instructions” / system prompts for ChatGPT and similar LLMs.
  • Main goals: reduce verbosity, improve code quality, suppress moralizing, and shape personality or style.

Common Custom Instructions

  • “Be terse / concise / no yapping / no essays” is by far the most common request.
  • Many ask for:
    • Direct answers first, explanations later.
    • Code-first responses, often with specific language, style, or stack (e.g., ESM imports, async/await, Tailwind, Elixir by default, no semicolons in JS).
    • No restating the question, no apologies, no disclaimers, no “I’m an AI…”.
    • Avoid numbered lists; prefer summaries or prose.
  • Several prompts define roles: “expert in X”, software architect, polymath, medical assistant, etc.

Terseness vs Verbosity

  • Split in preferences:
    • Some insist brevity boosts usability and reduces boilerplate, especially on slow models.
    • Others argue longer, step-by-step “chain-of-thought” answers improve quality and reliability.
  • A hybrid approach appears popular: detailed internal reasoning but short summary at the end, or verbosity controlled via a flag (e.g., V=0–5, or keywords like “vv”).

Reasoning, Computation & Prompt Theory

  • Repeated idea: each extra token is more “computation,” which may improve reasoning.
  • Some instruct models explicitly to:
    • State assumptions.
    • Break problems into steps.
    • Provide multiple solutions or perspectives.
    • Self-check and correct earlier answers (with mixed success).
  • Discussion of research showing “think step by step” / “take a deep breath” can help; not everyone is convinced more tokens always help.

Ethics, Safety & Tone

  • Many users explicitly try to disable:
    • Moral lectures, safety disclaimers, or “political correctness”.
    • Suggestions to seek professionals or other sources.
  • Several stress neutrality and fact-focus; corrections are desired when facts are wrong.
  • Some find the constant safety framing akin to “coffee is hot” warnings; others note it originates from past chatbot failures and PR concerns.

Humor, Abuse & Anthropomorphism

  • Numerous playful or adversarial prompts: pirate talk, Ali G, snark, calling PowerShell “StupidShell,” threats of “death,” tips for saving kittens, being in love with the user, etc.
  • Some commenters find this fun; others find it depressing or “tribal/ritualistic,” likening it to incantations before a black box.

Skepticism & Practical Limits

  • Several report that models often ignore instructions (especially brevity, partial-code-only, or “never say X”).
  • Some doubt that long, intricate meta-prompts help much beyond what defaults already provide.
  • Others prefer no customization at all, relying on conversational steering and follow-up questions instead.