Resource
Is My Prompt Clear Enough?
Answer the question directly: a clarity score plus the specific reasons a prompt reads as unclear — vague terms, unstated objective, missing specifics.
Prompt Specificity Check
Check whether a prompt pins down the details that matter — length, format, audience, examples, criteria — or leaves them for the model to guess.
Overview
A prompt is specific when it names the concrete anchors a model needs: a length, a format, an audience, examples, success criteria. This loads a prompt that has almost none of them — "write some marketing copy, make it sound good, get them interested" — and shows which anchors are missing out of six. Missing anchors are where the model fills gaps with its own assumptions. The check reports the specificity gap; it does not fill it in.
How to use this resource
-
Paste the prompt
One you suspect leaves the details open.
-
Check the six anchors
Length, format, audience, examples, criteria, numbers.
-
See what is missing
Each absent anchor is where the model will guess.
Why This Works
- Specificity is concrete anchors — length, format, audience, criteria
- Counting anchors out of six makes the gap measurable
- Missing anchors are exactly where a model fills in assumptions
Best for
- Checking a prompt for missing specifics
- A concrete-anchor audit
- Reducing model guesswork
Not for
- Adding the missing specifics — that's the Prompt Rewriter
- Building a prompt from scratch — that's the Template Builder
FAQ
What are the six anchors this specificity check counts?
Number, length limit, format, audience, examples, and criteria — the STRUCTURE ANALYSIS reports "Specificity anchors present: 1 of 6." The loaded prompt hits only one, scoring "Specificity: 13/100," and each absent anchor is where the model fills the gap with its own assumptions. The prompt-readability-checker surfaces the count; it flags where guesswork will happen, not what the answer should be.
Will this check add the missing details for me?
It won't — it's a read-only diagnosis, stated as "this is a read-only diagnosis — the prompt is not modified." It reports the gap: 1 of 6 anchors, a vague quality term ("good"), a vague quantity ("some"), and a bare-pronoun reference. Filling those in is a different job — the OBSERVATION NOTES point you to the Prompt Rewriter to rewrite for strength or the Prompt Cleaner to remove redundancy.
More resources from Prompt Readability Checker
Resource
Prompt Readability Checker
Diagnose a prompt before you send it: explainable scores for clarity, ambiguity, specificity, and structure, with observations that name where it is vague.
Resource
Detect Ambiguity in a Prompt
Surface the ambiguity a model will exploit: vague quantities, hedges, undefined time, open-ended lists, and conflicting instructions — flagged, not fixed.
Resources that pair well
Resource
Prompt Cleanup Examples (Before & After)
A set of before-and-after examples showing exactly what prompt cleanup removes — and what it deliberately leaves alone.
Resource
Fix a Vague Prompt
'Make it good', 'be detailed', 'keep it interesting' — vague prompts get vague output. The fix is mechanical: replace every fuzzy word with a checkable instruction.
Resource
Agent Instruction Prompt Formatter
Formats fuzzy agent instructions into a structured prompt with objective, available tools, constraints, success criteria, and failure handling.
Related tools
Tool
Prompt Readability Checker
Diagnose a prompt's clarity before you send it — explainable scores for clarity, ambiguity, specificity, and structure. Read-only; it never rewrites.