AI Prompts for Prevent Reversion of Approved Changes

Please quote the last output you generated that resulted in the reversion of my changes. Specifically, reference the function in [FILE] at line [LINE] that was altered. Provide the exact output you produced along with a description of the expected behavior for that function.

Please analyze the following output log from the last deployment attempt: [OUTPUT LOG]. Focus specifically on identifying any warnings or errors that suggest reasons for the reversion of my approved changes. Provide a detailed explanation for each issue found, including potential impacts and recommendations for resolution.

Please summarize your interpretation of my last instruction regarding the approved changes. Include key points that clarify what was communicated, any potential areas of misunderstanding, and how these interpretations align with the intended goals. This summary should help us identify any miscommunication and ensure we are on the same page moving forward.

Create a detailed comparison of the expected behavior versus the actual behavior of the component in [FILE] after my last changes. Please outline the specific functionalities that were intended to work correctly and describe how the actual outcomes deviated from these expectations. Include any relevant error messages, performance issues, or unexpected results, and format your response in a clear table with separate columns for expected behavior and actual behavior.

Please identify the specific rule or constraint that was violated when my changes were reverted in the context of [USE-CASE]. Quote the exact clause from the relevant documentation that applies to this situation and provide a brief explanation of why this rule is significant in this context.

Please revert the function signature at [FILE]:[LINE] back to its original form, which is [PASTE]. Before applying the change, provide me with a diff of the modification so I can review what will be altered. Ensure that only the signature is reverted and no other changes are made.

Rewrite the component in [FILE] to ensure it strictly adheres to the approved changes. Clearly outline the explicit constraints that must be implemented to prevent any future reversion of these changes. Additionally, provide a brief explanation of how these constraints will safeguard the integrity of the approved modifications.

Make a scoped change to the component in [FILE] that preserves the state of your approved changes. Clearly identify the specific parts that need modification and explain how to implement these changes without affecting the previous work. Provide a summary of the potential risks involved in this process and suggest best practices to ensure that the integrity of the existing code is maintained.

Please review the component at [FILE] for format consistency. Ensure that it adheres to the approved style and structure guidelines. Provide a detailed report on any discrepancies found, including specific examples of inconsistencies and suggestions for corrections to prevent automatic reversion in the future.

Please review the dependencies in [FILE] to identify any incorrect references that could potentially cause issues with my approved changes. For each discrepancy found, provide a detailed explanation of the problem and the specific correction needed to ensure stability. Format your response as a list, including the original reference, the corrected reference, and a brief rationale for each change.

Please run a test on the functionality of the component in [FILE]. Ensure that my approved changes are preserved by comparing the expected output with the actual output. Provide a detailed report on any discrepancies found, including the specific areas where the outputs do not match and suggestions for resolving any issues.

Please provide the diff of the changes made to the component in [FILE] after applying the fix. Ensure that the output clearly highlights the modifications, including any additions or deletions, so I can verify that my approved changes remain intact. Format the response with a clear comparison between the original and modified versions.

Please replay the last scenario where my changes were reverted. Confirm whether the issue still occurs and ensure that my changes are preserved. Provide a detailed report of the results, including any error messages encountered and the steps taken during the replay.

Please analyze the component located at [FILE] for potential edge cases that could lead to reversion of my approved changes. Identify at least three specific scenarios where the changes might fail, and provide a detailed explanation of why each scenario poses a risk. Additionally, suggest any modifications or tests that could be implemented to mitigate these risks and ensure the stability of the approved changes.

Please confirm the output state of the component in [FILE] after applying the fix. Verify that the output accurately reflects my approved changes and that no reversion has occurred. Provide a detailed comparison of the current output against the expected output, highlighting any discrepancies or confirmations of success.

Please create a session-opening constraint for the project related to change approval verification. Use the following format: 'Before any deployment step: verify that all approved changes in [SPECIFIC FILE] are intact. If any changes are reverted, stop and alert the developer before continuing.' Ensure the wording is clear and concise, and provide any additional context that may be relevant for implementation.

Please create a conversation-starter template for alerting me when any changes I approved are about to be reverted. The alert should follow this format: 'Alert: Changes in [SPECIFIC FILE] are at risk of reversion. Please confirm before proceeding.' Additionally, include a brief explanation of why confirming the changes is important and a reminder to check the change history for context.

Create a project specification message that documents all approved changes. Ensure to include the following details: a list of changes made, the corresponding timestamps for each change, and notes from the developers explaining the rationale behind each change. Format this documentation to be stored in [SPECIFIC FILE] to serve as a reference and prevent future reversion of these changes.

Establish a naming convention for all approved changes in the project. All approved changes in [SPECIFIC FILE] must be prefixed with APPROVED_ to ensure they are recognized and preserved. Please provide a detailed explanation of the importance of this convention, how it will be implemented, and any potential challenges that may arise during its adoption.

Please create a self-check request for change preservation that I can send to the agent. The request should follow this format: 'Before any deployment, verify that all changes in [SPECIFIC FILE] are marked as approved and have not been altered.' Additionally, include a reminder to document any discrepancies found during this check and outline the steps to rectify them.