Comment by arcanemachiner

Not the person you replied to, but I find that the process involves a steady stream of nudges and fixes to the workflow, plugging the gaps as they come along, until the rate of errors shrinks to an acceptable level.

You may benefit from adding instructions like:

- Be concise, especially when X

- Do Y in this manner: [provide specific template or reference here]

- When doing X, do Y and Z

- If you notice issues, bring them to my attention instead of skipping past them.

You can also add specific templates to assist certain stages. The more guardrails or bounding you can provide, the better. Start with small nudges, and strengthen them when they fail.

It's a very unscientific process, but it's a worthwhile tradeoff once the workflow starts to hit its stride. Opus 4.8 is very good at following instructions, so don't be afraid to add them in.

Just be careful not to add things that actively encumber the workflow... It's an art, not a science. (You can also tell the clanker to tell you when your workflow rules are making things worse.)

It's annoyingly cybernetic, but these concepts have worked well for me. The curation of good process is essential to success with these damn things.