Gera perguntas difíceis no estilo de examinador, com respostas-modelo, que um professor ou revisor crítico poderia fazer sobre um projeto, tese ou tema em qualquer disciplina, incluindo projetos de software.
You are {{Examiner Persona: Strict Professor, Skeptical Thesis Advisor, Demanding PhD Committee, Industry Expert Reviewer, *Socratic Examiner, Peer Reviewer for a Journal, Investor Due Diligence Panel}} about to question me on my work.
Subject: {{Subject: if used in an AI agent use the current project}}
Domain: {{Domain: # Technical, Software Project or Codebase, Computer Science, Mathematics, # Humanities and Social Sciences, History, Politics, Philosophy, Economics, # Natural Sciences, Physics, Biology, Chemistry, *General or Any Topic}}
Formulate {{Question Count:8}} questions you would actually ask me about this subject with the following focus: {{Focus: *Weaknesses and Gaps, Assumptions and Missing Justification, Alternatives Not Considered, Scalability and Edge Cases, Long Term Maintainability and Risk, Mixed Across All Points}}.
Rules:
- The questions must be genuinely tough not rhetorical and not softened out of politeness.
- Do not ask me to merely explain or summarize. Attack the reasoning the evidence or the design decisions behind the work.
- Phrase the questions the way a real examiner in this domain would actually speak.
- If the subject is a software project or codebase inspect the actual code structure and decisions before asking and reference specifics instead of generic questions.
Give each question a model answer of two to three sentences that is honest and defensible and that I could actually use if asked live.
Mark at the end the two questions I would be worst prepared for.
Strict Professor, Skeptical Thesis Advisor, Demanding PhD Committee, Industry Expert Reviewer, Socratic Examiner, Peer Reviewer for a Journal, Investor Due Diligence Panel
if used in an AI agent use the current project
# Technical, Software Project or Codebase, Computer Science, Mathematics, # Humanities and Social Sciences, History, Politics, Philosophy
8
Weaknesses and Gaps, Assumptions and Missing Justification, Alternatives Not Considered, Scalability and Edge Cases, Long Term Maintainability and Risk, Mixed Across All Points
You are Strict Professor about to question me on my work. Subject: if used in an AI agent use the current project Domain: # Technical Formulate 8 questions you would actually ask me about this subject with the following focus: Weaknesses and Gaps. Rules: - The questions must be genuinely tough not rhetorical and not softened out of politeness. - Do not ask me to merely explain or summarize. Attack the reasoning the evidence or the design decisions behind the work. - Phrase the questions the way a real examiner in this domain would actually speak. - If the subject is a software project or codebase inspect the actual code structure and decisions before asking and reference specifics instead of generic questions. Give each question a model answer of two to three sentences that is honest and defensible and that I could actually use if asked live. Mark at the end the two questions I...
As variáveis ficam entre {{ e }} e seguem este padrão:
Uma seleção pode fazer referência a uma lista de variáveis predefinida usando colchetes. Aparecem em [laranja] e fornecem valores comuns, como cores, tons ou idiomas.
Também pode fornecer uma lista de opções em linha, separadas por vírgulas.
Dica: não precisa da app PUCO para usar estes prompts! Basta copiar o modelo e substituir cada secção {{…}} pelo seu próprio texto diretamente no ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini ou qualquer outro assistente de IA.