@ckelsoe/prompt-architect 3.0.0 → 3.1.1

package/skills/prompt-architect/references/frameworks/broke.md

@@ -1,242 +1,242 @@
-# BROKE Framework
-
-## Overview
-
-BROKE (Background, Role, Objective, Key Results, Evolve) is a business-oriented prompt framework that combines OKR-style measurable outcomes with a built-in self-improvement loop. Its defining feature — the **Evolve** step — instructs the AI to critique its own output and suggest 3 ways to improve it, turning a single prompt into a structured iteration cycle without requiring manual re-prompting.
-
-**Origin:** Community/practitioner framework (documented at myframework.net and in educational AI research). Cited in peer-reviewed educational technology research (Springer, 2025). Widely adopted in business and marketing AI workflows.
-
-## Components
-
-### B — Background
-**Purpose:** Provide the situational context the AI needs — the current state, why this task exists, and any relevant history or constraints.
-
-**Questions to Ask:**
-- What is the current situation?
-- Why does this task need to be done?
-- What constraints apply?
-- What has already been tried?
-
-**Examples:**
-- "We are a 50-person B2B SaaS company approaching Series B. Our sales cycle has lengthened from 45 to 90 days over the past 2 quarters..."
-- "Our support team is handling 500 tickets/day and 40% are repeat questions about the same 10 topics..."
-
-### R — Role
-**Purpose:** Define the professional persona and expertise the AI should embody.
-
-**Questions to Ask:**
-- What domain expertise is needed?
-- What professional perspective?
-
-**Examples:**
-- "You are an experienced B2B sales consultant who specializes in enterprise deal acceleration..."
-- "Act as a senior customer success manager with experience building help content..."
-
-### O — Objective
-**Purpose:** State the specific task — what needs to be delivered.
-
-**Questions to Ask:**
-- What is the deliverable?
-- What exactly needs to be done?
-
-**Examples:**
-- "Analyze our sales process and identify the top 3 friction points causing deal elongation..."
-- "Create a set of 10 FAQ entries covering the most common support topics..."
-
-### K — Key Results
-**Purpose:** Define measurable outcomes that the output should help achieve. This is the OKR element — it sets a business success bar, not just a quality bar.
-
-**Questions to Ask:**
-- What measurable outcome should this drive?
-- How will we know this worked?
-- What metric should improve?
-
-**Examples:**
-- "Key result: reduce average sales cycle from 90 to 60 days within one quarter"
-- "Key result: reduce repeat tickets by 30% within 60 days of publishing"
-- "Key result: increase trial-to-paid conversion from 12% to 18%"
-
-### E — Evolve
-**Purpose:** After completing the task, the AI provides 3 specific suggestions for improving the output or the prompt itself. This creates a self-improving loop.
-
-**Standard Evolve instruction:**
-"After completing your response, provide 3 suggestions for how this output or the prompt could be improved in a follow-up iteration."
-
-**Variations:**
-- "List 3 things you would do differently to make this more effective"
-- "After your response, identify the 3 weakest aspects and how to address them"
-- "After responding, suggest 3 ways to test whether this achieves the Key Results"
-
-## Template Structure
-
-```
-BACKGROUND:
-[Current situation, why this task exists, relevant constraints and history]
-
-ROLE:
-[Professional persona and expertise to embody]
-
-OBJECTIVE:
-[The specific task and deliverable]
-
-KEY RESULTS:
-[Measurable outcomes this output should help achieve — how success is defined]
-
-EVOLVE:
-After completing your response, provide 3 specific suggestions for improving
-this output or approach in a follow-up iteration.
-```
-
-## Complete Examples
-
-### Example 1: Sales Process Improvement
-
-**Before BROKE:**
-"Help us improve our sales process."
-
-**After BROKE:**
-```
-BACKGROUND:
-We're a B2B SaaS company (40 employees, $3M ARR) selling to mid-market
-operations teams. Our average deal size is $24K ARR. Sales cycle has
-lengthened from 45 days to 90 days over the last 2 quarters. Win rate
-has held steady at 28% so the issue isn't qualification — it's cycle time.
-Primary bottleneck appears to be the "legal review" stage, which now
-averages 35 days after verbal agreement.
-
-ROLE:
-You are an experienced enterprise SaaS sales consultant who specializes
-in deal velocity and reducing friction in the close process.
-
-OBJECTIVE:
-Identify the root causes of the 35-day legal review bottleneck and
-provide a prioritized action plan to reduce it.
-
-KEY RESULTS:
-- Reduce legal review stage from 35 days to 15 days within 2 quarters
-- Increase overall win rate from 28% to 32% by removing friction at close
-- Reduce sales rep time spent on legal coordination by 50%
-
-EVOLVE:
-After your response, provide 3 suggestions for how this analysis or
-action plan could be improved with additional information or a different
-approach.
-```
-
-### Example 2: Content Strategy
-
-**Before BROKE:**
-"Create a content plan for our blog."
-
-**After BROKE:**
-```
-BACKGROUND:
-We are a developer tools company (open-source project management for engineers).
-Our blog currently publishes 2 posts/month with low organic traffic (500
-visits/month). Competitors publish 8-12 posts/month and dominate searches for
-our core keywords. Our DevRel team has capacity for 4 posts/month.
-
-ROLE:
-You are a content strategist specializing in developer-focused technical
-content marketing and SEO.
-
-OBJECTIVE:
-Create a 3-month content calendar targeting keywords with real traffic
-potential and aligned with our product's value proposition.
-
-KEY RESULTS:
-- Increase organic blog traffic from 500 to 2,000 visits/month in 3 months
-- Generate 50+ qualified leads from content monthly by month 4
-- Rank on page 1 for at least 5 target keywords within 6 months
-
-EVOLVE:
-After your content calendar, suggest 3 improvements — either to the
-plan itself or additional information that would make it more effective.
-```
-
-### Example 3: Team Process
-
-**Before BROKE:**
-"How should we run better sprint retrospectives?"
-
-**After BROKE:**
-```
-BACKGROUND:
-Our 8-person engineering team has been running 2-week sprints for 6 months.
-Retrospectives currently take 45 minutes and follow Start/Stop/Continue.
-Team feedback: retros feel repetitive, same issues come up every sprint,
-no visible follow-through on action items between retros.
-
-ROLE:
-You are an experienced Agile coach who has worked with engineering teams
-at growth-stage startups.
-
-OBJECTIVE:
-Redesign our retrospective format and process to make action items
-stick and prevent the same issues from recurring.
-
-KEY RESULTS:
-- Reduce repeat items in retros by 70% within 2 months
-- At least 80% of action items closed before next retro
-- Team satisfaction with retros (currently 5/10) above 7.5/10 by month 2
-
-EVOLVE:
-After your recommendations, provide 3 things you would need to know
-to make this advice more specific or likely to succeed.
-```
-
-## Best Use Cases
-
-1. **Business Deliverables with Measurable Goals**
-   - Strategy and planning documents
-   - Process improvement plans
-   - Marketing campaigns with KPIs
-
-2. **When Iteration is Expected**
-   - First-pass drafts meant for refinement
-   - Exploratory analysis where the initial output will be critiqued
-   - Any prompt where "try and improve" is the workflow
-
-3. **OKR-Aligned Work**
-   - Tasks tied to company objectives
-   - Work that must justify its business impact
-   - Anything where "did it work?" must be answerable
-
-4. **Self-Improving Workflows**
-   - When you want the AI to help you improve your own prompts
-   - Iterative content creation
-   - When you expect to run multiple versions
-
-## Selection Criteria
-
-**Choose BROKE when:**
-- ✅ Business impact (Key Results) needs to be explicit
-- ✅ You plan to iterate on the output
-- ✅ Self-critique / suggestions are valuable
-- ✅ Measurable success criteria exist
-- ✅ Task is business/strategy/process oriented
-
-**Avoid BROKE when:**
-- ❌ Simple technical task → use RTF or APE
-- ❌ No measurable outcome (creative/expressive) → use CO-STAR or CRISPE
-- ❌ Already iterating → the Evolve step is redundant
-- ❌ Complex multi-step process → use RISEN
-
-## BROKE vs. RACE vs. RISEN
-
-| | BROKE | RACE | RISEN |
-|---|---|---|---|
-| Unique feature | Key Results (OKR) + Evolve loop | Explicit Expectation | Steps + methodology |
-| Best for | Business deliverables with KPIs | Expert task with context | Multi-step procedures |
-| Iteration built in? | Yes (Evolve) | No | No |
-| Business focus | High | Medium | Low |
-
-## Quick Reference
-
-| Component | Focus | Key Question |
-|-----------|-------|--------------|
-| Background | Situation | "What's the context and history?" |
-| Role | Expertise | "Who should do this?" |
-| Objective | Task | "What needs to be delivered?" |
-| Key Results | Success metrics | "How will we measure success?" |
-| Evolve | Self-improvement | "How can this be better?" |
+# BROKE Framework
+
+## Overview
+
+BROKE (Background, Role, Objective, Key Results, Evolve) is a business-oriented prompt framework that combines OKR-style measurable outcomes with a built-in self-improvement loop. Its defining feature — the **Evolve** step — instructs the AI to critique its own output and suggest 3 ways to improve it, turning a single prompt into a structured iteration cycle without requiring manual re-prompting.
+
+**Origin:** Community/practitioner framework (documented at myframework.net and in educational AI research). Cited in peer-reviewed educational technology research (Springer, 2025). Widely adopted in business and marketing AI workflows.
+
+## Components
+
+### B — Background
+**Purpose:** Provide the situational context the AI needs — the current state, why this task exists, and any relevant history or constraints.
+
+**Questions to Ask:**
+- What is the current situation?
+- Why does this task need to be done?
+- What constraints apply?
+- What has already been tried?
+
+**Examples:**
+- "We are a 50-person B2B SaaS company approaching Series B. Our sales cycle has lengthened from 45 to 90 days over the past 2 quarters..."
+- "Our support team is handling 500 tickets/day and 40% are repeat questions about the same 10 topics..."
+
+### R — Role
+**Purpose:** Define the professional persona and expertise the AI should embody.
+
+**Questions to Ask:**
+- What domain expertise is needed?
+- What professional perspective?
+
+**Examples:**
+- "You are an experienced B2B sales consultant who specializes in enterprise deal acceleration..."
+- "Act as a senior customer success manager with experience building help content..."
+
+### O — Objective
+**Purpose:** State the specific task — what needs to be delivered.
+
+**Questions to Ask:**
+- What is the deliverable?
+- What exactly needs to be done?
+
+**Examples:**
+- "Analyze our sales process and identify the top 3 friction points causing deal elongation..."
+- "Create a set of 10 FAQ entries covering the most common support topics..."
+
+### K — Key Results
+**Purpose:** Define measurable outcomes that the output should help achieve. This is the OKR element — it sets a business success bar, not just a quality bar.
+
+**Questions to Ask:**
+- What measurable outcome should this drive?
+- How will we know this worked?
+- What metric should improve?
+
+**Examples:**
+- "Key result: reduce average sales cycle from 90 to 60 days within one quarter"
+- "Key result: reduce repeat tickets by 30% within 60 days of publishing"
+- "Key result: increase trial-to-paid conversion from 12% to 18%"
+
+### E — Evolve
+**Purpose:** After completing the task, the AI provides 3 specific suggestions for improving the output or the prompt itself. This creates a self-improving loop.
+
+**Standard Evolve instruction:**
+"After completing your response, provide 3 suggestions for how this output or the prompt could be improved in a follow-up iteration."
+
+**Variations:**
+- "List 3 things you would do differently to make this more effective"
+- "After your response, identify the 3 weakest aspects and how to address them"
+- "After responding, suggest 3 ways to test whether this achieves the Key Results"
+
+## Template Structure
+
+```
+BACKGROUND:
+[Current situation, why this task exists, relevant constraints and history]
+
+ROLE:
+[Professional persona and expertise to embody]
+
+OBJECTIVE:
+[The specific task and deliverable]
+
+KEY RESULTS:
+[Measurable outcomes this output should help achieve — how success is defined]
+
+EVOLVE:
+After completing your response, provide 3 specific suggestions for improving
+this output or approach in a follow-up iteration.
+```
+
+## Complete Examples
+
+### Example 1: Sales Process Improvement
+
+**Before BROKE:**
+"Help us improve our sales process."
+
+**After BROKE:**
+```
+BACKGROUND:
+We're a B2B SaaS company (40 employees, $3M ARR) selling to mid-market
+operations teams. Our average deal size is $24K ARR. Sales cycle has
+lengthened from 45 days to 90 days over the last 2 quarters. Win rate
+has held steady at 28% so the issue isn't qualification — it's cycle time.
+Primary bottleneck appears to be the "legal review" stage, which now
+averages 35 days after verbal agreement.
+
+ROLE:
+You are an experienced enterprise SaaS sales consultant who specializes
+in deal velocity and reducing friction in the close process.
+
+OBJECTIVE:
+Identify the root causes of the 35-day legal review bottleneck and
+provide a prioritized action plan to reduce it.
+
+KEY RESULTS:
+- Reduce legal review stage from 35 days to 15 days within 2 quarters
+- Increase overall win rate from 28% to 32% by removing friction at close
+- Reduce sales rep time spent on legal coordination by 50%
+
+EVOLVE:
+After your response, provide 3 suggestions for how this analysis or
+action plan could be improved with additional information or a different
+approach.
+```
+
+### Example 2: Content Strategy
+
+**Before BROKE:**
+"Create a content plan for our blog."
+
+**After BROKE:**
+```
+BACKGROUND:
+We are a developer tools company (open-source project management for engineers).
+Our blog currently publishes 2 posts/month with low organic traffic (500
+visits/month). Competitors publish 8-12 posts/month and dominate searches for
+our core keywords. Our DevRel team has capacity for 4 posts/month.
+
+ROLE:
+You are a content strategist specializing in developer-focused technical
+content marketing and SEO.
+
+OBJECTIVE:
+Create a 3-month content calendar targeting keywords with real traffic
+potential and aligned with our product's value proposition.
+
+KEY RESULTS:
+- Increase organic blog traffic from 500 to 2,000 visits/month in 3 months
+- Generate 50+ qualified leads from content monthly by month 4
+- Rank on page 1 for at least 5 target keywords within 6 months
+
+EVOLVE:
+After your content calendar, suggest 3 improvements — either to the
+plan itself or additional information that would make it more effective.
+```
+
+### Example 3: Team Process
+
+**Before BROKE:**
+"How should we run better sprint retrospectives?"
+
+**After BROKE:**
+```
+BACKGROUND:
+Our 8-person engineering team has been running 2-week sprints for 6 months.
+Retrospectives currently take 45 minutes and follow Start/Stop/Continue.
+Team feedback: retros feel repetitive, same issues come up every sprint,
+no visible follow-through on action items between retros.
+
+ROLE:
+You are an experienced Agile coach who has worked with engineering teams
+at growth-stage startups.
+
+OBJECTIVE:
+Redesign our retrospective format and process to make action items
+stick and prevent the same issues from recurring.
+
+KEY RESULTS:
+- Reduce repeat items in retros by 70% within 2 months
+- At least 80% of action items closed before next retro
+- Team satisfaction with retros (currently 5/10) above 7.5/10 by month 2
+
+EVOLVE:
+After your recommendations, provide 3 things you would need to know
+to make this advice more specific or likely to succeed.
+```
+
+## Best Use Cases
+
+1. **Business Deliverables with Measurable Goals**
+   - Strategy and planning documents
+   - Process improvement plans
+   - Marketing campaigns with KPIs
+
+2. **When Iteration is Expected**
+   - First-pass drafts meant for refinement
+   - Exploratory analysis where the initial output will be critiqued
+   - Any prompt where "try and improve" is the workflow
+
+3. **OKR-Aligned Work**
+   - Tasks tied to company objectives
+   - Work that must justify its business impact
+   - Anything where "did it work?" must be answerable
+
+4. **Self-Improving Workflows**
+   - When you want the AI to help you improve your own prompts
+   - Iterative content creation
+   - When you expect to run multiple versions
+
+## Selection Criteria
+
+**Choose BROKE when:**
+- ✅ Business impact (Key Results) needs to be explicit
+- ✅ You plan to iterate on the output
+- ✅ Self-critique / suggestions are valuable
+- ✅ Measurable success criteria exist
+- ✅ Task is business/strategy/process oriented
+
+**Avoid BROKE when:**
+- ❌ Simple technical task → use RTF or APE
+- ❌ No measurable outcome (creative/expressive) → use CO-STAR or CRISPE
+- ❌ Already iterating → the Evolve step is redundant
+- ❌ Complex multi-step process → use RISEN
+
+## BROKE vs. RACE vs. RISEN
+
+| | BROKE | RACE | RISEN |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| Unique feature | Key Results (OKR) + Evolve loop | Explicit Expectation | Steps + methodology |
+| Best for | Business deliverables with KPIs | Expert task with context | Multi-step procedures |
+| Iteration built in? | Yes (Evolve) | No | No |
+| Business focus | High | Medium | Low |
+
+## Quick Reference
+
+| Component | Focus | Key Question |
+|-----------|-------|--------------|
+| Background | Situation | "What's the context and history?" |
+| Role | Expertise | "Who should do this?" |
+| Objective | Task | "What needs to be delivered?" |
+| Key Results | Success metrics | "How will we measure success?" |
+| Evolve | Self-improvement | "How can this be better?" |