Continue — Prompts
Prompt 1: Security Audit Check
Source: .continue/checks/security-audit.md
Technique: Task-scoped review agent with explicit scope constraint ("do NOT look into anything unless it was changed in the pull request")
---
name: Security Audit
description: Security Audit
---
Please audit this pull request for any security vulnerabilities that were introduced. In particular you should look for new sources of potential prompt injections, or other vulnerabilities caused by the fact that this extension / CLI run locally on a user's machine. Do NOT look into anything unless it was changed in the pull request. When you are done, please make the required changes.
Note: The prompt is highly specific to Continue's own security concerns (prompt injection in an AI tool that runs locally).
Prompt 2: Anti-Slop Check
Source: .continue/checks/anti-slop.md
Technique: Anti-pattern enumeration — 10 specific patterns to detect and remove. Each pattern is concrete enough to be reliably detected.
---
name: Anti-slop
description: Fix AI Slop
---
I want to follow the **Anti AI-slop rule**: clean up any AI-generated code patterns that harm readability and maintainability...
**What qualifies as AI slop in code:**
1. **Overly verbose comments** - Comments that restate exactly what the code does (e.g., `// increment counter by 1` above `counter++`)
2. **Excessive defensive programming** - Unnecessary null checks, try-catches, or validations that clutter the logic
3. **Redundant type annotations** - Type declarations already inferred by the compiler
4. **Boilerplate explosion** - Separate classes/functions for trivial operations that could be a simple expression
5. **Over-abstraction** - Interfaces with single implementations, factories that create one thing
6. **Verbose variable names that obscure intent** - e.g., `currentUserAuthenticationStatusBoolean` instead of `isAuthenticated`
7. **Unnecessary intermediate variables** - Variables used exactly once on the next line
8. **Repetitive error handling** - Copy-pasted try-catch blocks that could be consolidated
9. **Filler documentation** - JSDoc that adds no information beyond the function signature
10. **"Just in case" code** - Unused parameters, dead code paths, or features for hypothetical future needs
**The goal:** Code should be concise, readable, and no more complex than necessary. Remove ceremony, not functionality.
Source: .continue/agents/input-validation.md
Technique: Named specialist agent with focused domain.
(Content not fully visible, but format follows YAML frontmatter + specialized instructions for checking input validation completeness across a PR diff.)
Prompt 4: Anti-Slop Rule (rules file)
Source: .continue/rules/anti-slop-rule.md
Technique: Persistent behavioral rule injected into all agent runs — the rule file version of the anti-slop check is injected as a constraint, not just a one-time check.
Prompting Techniques Used
- PR-diff scoping — all checks are scoped to "what changed in this PR" not "the whole codebase"
- Anti-pattern enumeration — exhaustive lists of specific patterns to detect
- Domain-specific agents — each agent/check has a single responsibility
- Make-required-changes pattern — checks don't just report; they "make the required changes" (action not just comment)
- Persistent rule injection — rules in
.continue/rules/ are injected as constraints across all runs
- Markdown-as-CI — check files are version-controlled quality gates, not chatbot prompts