Claude prompt patterns developers actually use

Most prompt-engineering content is generic. The patterns that work for developers using Claude in actual project work are narrower and concrete. ## Pattern 1: anchor with constraints Start every prompt with the constraints (stack, language version, framework, deployment target). Without them, Claude defaults to mainstream choices that may not fit your stack. ## Pattern 2: ask for adversarial review "Here is a function. List five ways this can fail under concurrent load." Adversarial framing produces better edge-case discovery than open-ended review. ## Pattern 3: compare two designs "I am choosing between approach A (...) and approach B (...). What are the tradeoffs at 100x scale?" Comparison framing forces explicit reasoning instead of vague suggestions. ## Pattern 4: stepwise reasoning before code "Before writing code, list the steps and the edge cases you will handle. Then write the code." Forcing the plan first cuts iteration cycles. ## Pattern 5: post-mortem of your own work "Here is a bug that took me 2 hours to find. What signals could I have noticed faster?" Turns past pain into transferable habits. ## What rarely works Asking for "best practices" unscoped. Asking for "production-ready" code without testing it. Trusting the first answer for anything security-sensitive. Asking Claude to generate large amounts of unsupervised code. ## Workflow integration Most experienced developers integrate Claude through one of: terminal CLI, IDE assistant, dedicated chat. Pick one and use it consistently; switching between three is friction.