Continuously trying to correct a confused AI in a long conversation is often futile, as a 'poisoned' context can lead it astray. The most effective approach is to abandon the conversation, start a new one, and incorporate your learnings into a better initial prompt.
Related Insights
AI models like Claude Code can experience a decline in output quality as their context window fills. It is recommended to start a new session once the context usage exceeds 50% to avoid this degradation, which can manifest as the model 'forgetting' earlier instructions.
When an AI coding assistant gets off track, Tim McLear asks it to generate a summary prompt for another AI to take over. This "resume work" prompt forces the AI to consolidate the context and goal. This summary often reveals where the AI misunderstood the request, allowing him to correct the course and restart with a cleaner prompt.
When your primary AI assistant gets stuck, export the conversation and feed it to a different model (e.g., GPT-4 or Gemini). This 'second opinion' can critique the original interaction and help you revise your prompt to get back on track, rather than trying to argue with the stuck AI.
When an AI model gives nonsensical responses after a long conversation, its context window is likely full. Instead of trying to correct it, reset the context. For prototypes, fork the design to start a new session. For chats, ask the AI to summarize the conversation, then start a new chat with that summary.
Long, continuous AI chat threads degrade output quality as the context window fills up, making it harder for the model to recall early details. To maintain high-quality results, treat each discrete feature or task as a new chat, ensuring the agent has a clean, focused context for each job.
Getting a useful result from AI is a dialogue, not a single command. An initial prompt often yields an unusable output. Success requires analyzing the failure and providing a more specific, refined prompt, much like giving an employee clearer instructions to get the desired outcome.
Long-running AI agent conversations degrade in quality as the context window fills. The best engineers combat this with "intentional compaction": they direct the agent to summarize its progress into a clean markdown file, then start a fresh session using that summary as the new, clean input. This is like rebooting the agent's short-term memory.
Long conversations degrade LLM performance as attention gets clogged with irrelevant details. An expert workflow is to stop, ask the model to summarize the key points of the discussion, and then start a fresh chat with that summary as the initial prompt. This keeps the context clean and the model on track.
When a coding agent loses context, don't just start over. A power-user technique is to begin a new session and instruct the agent to read the locally stored conversation logs from the previous, failed session to regain context and continue the task.
When a prompt yields poor results, use a meta-prompting technique. Feed the failing prompt back to the AI, describe the incorrect output, specify the desired outcome, and explicitly grant it permission to rewrite, add, or delete. The AI will then debug and improve its own instructions.
