By skyforbes For the longest time, I thought the inconsistency was the AI’s fault — brilliant one minute, totally off the rails the next. Creative here, chaotic there. You know the pattern.
But eventually it hit me:
A lot of that inconsistency was coming from me giving it a completely different identity and structure every time I prompted it.
Once I started using the same underlying structure — same role, same behavioral constraints, same logic pattern — something changed. The responses became way more stable and repeatable.
Suddenly it could stay “in character” as:
a researcher
a strategist
a writer with consistent tone
an editor that didn’t drift
a teacher with continuity
a system designer that followed its own architecture
even a creative partner that didn’t lose the thread
It stopped acting like a random generator and started acting like a predictable system.
The biggest shift for me was realizing that the magic wasn’t in fancy wording or “trick prompts.”
It was in repeatable structure — treating prompts almost like little frameworks instead of one-off instructions.
Curious if anyone else here has noticed the same thing:
Has “structured prompting” made your models way more consistent?
If anyone wants to see an example of the structure I’m talking about, I can share one.