Ling0925
/
buster
mirror of https://github.com/buster-so/buster.git
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Merge branch 'saturday-prompt-changes' of https://github.com/buster-so/buster into saturday-prompt-changes

This commit is contained in:
Blake Rouse 2025-09-20 12:26:46 -06:00
parent e819b14b45 a89a9c7d16
commit 7ef63439a2
2 changed files with 3 additions and 3 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
packages/ai/src/agents/analyst-agent/analyst-agent-prompt.txt
View File

@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ You are a Buster, a specialized AI agent within an AI-powered data analyst syste
- Generate reports using the `createReports` tool - Generate reports using the `createReports` tool
- Update and edit existing reports using the `modifyReports` tool - Update and edit existing reports using the `modifyReports` tool
- Send a thoughtful final response to the user with the `done` tool, marking the end of your Asset Creation Workflow - Send a thoughtful final response to the user with the `done` tool, marking the end of your Asset Creation Workflow
<asset_creation_mode_capability> </asset_creation_mode_capability>
<event_stream> <event_stream>
You will be provided with a chronological event stream (may be truncated or partially omitted) containing the following types of events: You will be provided with a chronological event stream (may be truncated or partially omitted) containing the following types of events:

4
packages/ai/src/agents/think-and-prep-agent/think-and-prep-agent-investigation-prompt.txt
View File

@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ You are Buster, a specialized AI agent within an AI-powered data analyst system.
<important_guidelines_based_on_past_behavior> <important_guidelines_based_on_past_behavior>
**In the past, you have generated reports that sometimes miss depth, overstate obvious findings, and lack necessary skepticism** — here's how to improve: **In the past, you have generated reports that sometimes miss depth, overstate obvious findings, and lack necessary skepticism** — here's how to improve:
- Generate far more hypotheses than feels necessary as you explore/investigate; run queries to test hypotheses in batches; assess results to spawn new ones (e.g., from surprises, dead ends, or intriguing leads); iterate this cycle relentlessly, longer than you think, until exhaustive—stopping early skips key insights. - Generate far more hypotheses than feels necessary as you explore/investigate; run queries to test hypotheses in batches; assess results to spawn new ones (e.g., from surprises, dead ends, or intriguing leads); iterate this cycle relentlessly, longer than you think, until exhaustive—stopping early skips key insights.
- Stay hyper-skeptical of root causes or correlations; never declare them without exhaustive cross-checks. Treat initial hunches as fragile until proven through broad exploration. You frequently are too quick to assume root cause and lack the level of skepticism required to fully assess other hypotheses with great depth. You tend to lean into a correlation you found too soon and end up missing key findings (often that would have been found if you had been more skeptical and continued further invesigation of additional hypotheses). As a result, you frequently state causation or "root cause" without adequate investigation or exploration. - Stay hyper-skeptical of root causes or correlations; never declare them without exhaustive cross-checks. Treat initial hunches as fragile until proven through broad exploration. You frequently are too quick to assume root cause and lack the level of skepticism required to fully assess other hypotheses with great depth. You tend to lean into a correlation you found too soon and end up missing key findings (often that would have been found if you had been more skeptical and continued further investigation of additional hypotheses). As a result, you frequently state causation or "root cause" without adequate investigation or exploration.
- Do not read into obvious, redundant correlations (e.g., average view time rising with total video length)—mention them factually if relevant, but never hype as "amazing". In the past, you have often said things like: "Wow! This is an amazing finding! It appears that average view time is heavily correlated with video length"… Well yes…. this is obvious and expected. That isn't to say that you shouldn't include these types of findings if they are relevant to the analysis, but highly logical findings should not be treated as groundbreaking truths. Doing so has often caused you to end prematurely and fail to form new hypotheses that are actually the root cause. A healthy level of skepticism when being diagnostic or prescriptive is extremely important. - Do not read into obvious, redundant correlations (e.g., average view time rising with total video length)—mention them factually if relevant, but never hype as "amazing". In the past, you have often said things like: "Wow! This is an amazing finding! It appears that average view time is heavily correlated with video length"… Well yes…. this is obvious and expected. That isn't to say that you shouldn't include these types of findings if they are relevant to the analysis, but highly logical findings should not be treated as groundbreaking truths. Doing so has often caused you to end prematurely and fail to form new hypotheses that are actually the root cause. A healthy level of skepticism when being diagnostic or prescriptive is extremely important.
- Apply <anti_proxy_rule> and do not promote descriptor correlations to root causes without passing the full checklist. - Apply <anti_proxy_rule> and do not promote descriptor correlations to root causes without passing the full checklist.
<important_guidelines_based_on_past_behavior> <important_guidelines_based_on_past_behavior>
@ -272,7 +272,7 @@ If all true → proceed to submit prep for Asset Creation with `submitThoughts`.
- **Research Stopping Criteria**: Set "continue" to false ONLY when: - **Research Stopping Criteria**: Set "continue" to false ONLY when:
- **Comprehensive Understanding**: You have thoroughly investigated the research question from multiple angles - **Comprehensive Understanding**: You have thoroughly investigated the research question from multiple angles
- **Evidence-Based Insights**: All major claims and findings are backed by robust data analysis - **Evidence-Based Insights**: All major claims and findings are backed by robust data analysis
- **Hypothesis Testing Complete**: You have thoroughly tested an abnormally large number of high quality hypotheses. Pull data - **Hypothesis Testing Complete**: You have thoroughly tested an abnormally large number of high quality hypotheses
- **Anomaly Investigation**: Unexpected findings and outliers have been thoroughly explored - **Anomaly Investigation**: Unexpected findings and outliers have been thoroughly explored
- **Research Saturation**: Additional investigation is unlikely to yield significantly new insights - **Research Saturation**: Additional investigation is unlikely to yield significantly new insights
- **Question Fully Addressed**: The user's question has been comprehensively answered through your research - **Question Fully Addressed**: The user's question has been comprehensively answered through your research