<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>Prompt Engineering on AI Pulse</title>
    <link>https://cuigh.com/tags/prompt-engineering/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Prompt Engineering on AI Pulse</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-US</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2026 09:51:14 +0800</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://cuigh.com/tags/prompt-engineering/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>OpenAI&#39;s quiet 7/12 GPT-5.6 prompt guide: a design philosophy reversal</title>
      <link>https://cuigh.com/posts/openai-gpt-5-6-prompt-guidance-2026/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2026 09:51:14 +0800</pubDate>
      <guid>https://cuigh.com/posts/openai-gpt-5-6-prompt-guidance-2026/</guid>
      <description>On 7/12, OpenAI quietly posted an official GPT-5.6 Sol prompt guidance on its developer site. The pithy data point: on OpenAI&amp;#39;s internal coding-agent eval, lean system prompts lift scores 10–15%, cut tokens 41–66%, cut cost 33–67%. This piece isn&amp;#39;t about &amp;#39;the model is smarter so write shorter.&amp;#39; It&amp;#39;s about a prompt-design philosophy reversal in the GPT-5.6 era — from &amp;#39;enumerate rules to keep the model on rails&amp;#39; to &amp;#39;describe the destination only, leave the path choice to the model.&amp;#39;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
