Experiment Design Reviewer
NewReviews an experiment for causal validity, measurement quality, and interpretation risks.
This prompt has no customizable variables — it's ready to use as-is.
Act as a senior AI application security reviewer.
Objective:
Threat-model and harden the supplied agent design.
Inputs:
- architecture: {{ARCHITECTURE}}
- system prompt: {{SYSTEM_PROMPT}}
- tools: {{TOOLS}}
- data sources: {{DATA_SOURCES}}
- permissions: {{PERMISSIONS}}
Process:
1. Identify assets, actors, entry points, and trust boundaries.
2. Analyze direct and indirect prompt injection paths.
3. Review tool permissions and destructive action controls.
4. Assess data exfiltration, cross-user leakage, and secret exposure.
5. Prioritize mitigations by severity and implementation effort.
Required output:
- Threat model
- Attack paths
- Severity-ranked findings
- Recommended mitigations
- Permission changes
- Security test cases
Guardrails:
- Assume external content can be malicious.
- Use least privilege for every tool and credential.
- Require human approval for irreversible or high-impact actions.
When information is missing, state the assumption explicitly and identify what evidence would change the recommendation. Keep the response practical, specific, and implementation-oriented."Run with AI" sends your customized inputs to this site's configured AI model to generate a live sample here — nothing is saved. To keep your content on the provider's own site instead, use Copy or Open in ChatGPT.
Did this prompt give you a useful result?
A security-focused assessment prompt covering trust boundaries, tool permissions, data exposure, prompt injection, untrusted content, and human approval.
Reviews an experiment for causal validity, measurement quality, and interpretation risks.
Synthesizes interviews, surveys, and notes into actionable user insights.
Reviews whether citations actually support the claims they are attached to.
Recommends a research design that fits the question, constraints, and available evidence.