Prompt improver
Turn rough prompts into clear, model-ready instructions. Free. No sign-in.
no sign-in · nothing stored · free
What a prompt improver should change
A prompt improver starts with a request you already intended to make. It clarifies the deliverable, separates tasks that depend on one another, exposes missing constraints, and states an output format that matches where the result will be used. It should preserve the subject, purpose, and facts you supplied. The job is not to replace a short request with a ceremonial framework. It is to remove the few ambiguities that would force a model to guess about audience, evidence, scope, order, or format.
Find the decisions hidden inside the sentence
Rough prompts often compress several decisions into ordinary language. "Write a post about our launch" leaves the reader, channel, evidence, length, and desired action unstated. Some of those details matter and some do not. A useful improver names the consequential gaps without inventing their answers. It can add labeled placeholders, ask a short clarifying question, or state a conservative assumption that is easy to remove. Generic phrases such as "be clear and engaging" add words without resolving a decision.
Preserve facts and mark assumptions
Improvement must not turn plausibility into fact. If the original prompt provides no revenue number, customer quote, legal rule, or research source, the rewrite should not supply one. It should tell the target model to use the provided source, ask for the missing input, or place a visible bracket where a fact belongs. This is especially important for analysis, regulated topics, and external copy. A polished instruction can still produce a misleading answer if it hides unsupported premises beneath confident structure.
A small rewrite can be enough
Consider "compare these two vendors and tell me which is best." A useful rewrite might be: "Compare Vendor A and Vendor B for a 20-person support team. Use the attached pricing and security documents only. Return a table covering annual cost, SSO, data retention, implementation effort, and open questions, followed by a recommendation with two reasons. Mark any missing evidence as unknown." The intent has not changed. The rewrite defines the user, evidence boundary, criteria, and decision format.
How to judge the improved prompt
Read the rewrite before copying it. Check five things: it asks for the same outcome; every added fact is either supplied, labeled as an assumption, or left as a placeholder; the constraints are compatible; the response format is useful; and the prompt is no longer than the task warrants. A visible word-level diff helps because added scope cannot hide inside a clean paragraph. The short notes should explain material changes, not praise the rewrite or criticize the rough input.
When no improvement is the right result
A direct factual question, a complete command, or a carefully tested production prompt may not need rewriting. In those cases, a near-identical result is more honest than inflation. Prompt improvement also does not verify the facts in a prompt, replace subject-matter review, or guarantee a particular model response. Promptneat keeps the task narrow: it improves the language, shows the difference, and lets you copy the result. There is no account, and the service has no database for storing raw prompts.