Chain-of-Thought Prompting

ReasoningReveal compared answer-only vs step-by-step and made you spot the wrong step. Visible reasoning only helps if you can check it.

Use a three-part pattern:

1. Decompose — name the smaller tasks or criteria
2. Answer — complete them in a useful order
3. Verify — test the result against the original request

For a complicated decision:

Help me choose between these three laptops for college.
First, make a short comparison plan using:
- price
- battery life
- weight
- ability to run my required software

Then recommend one in under 150 words.
Give a concise rationale with the 3 deciding facts.
Finally, list anything I should verify on the seller's page.

For a calculation, do not ask for pages of thought. Ask for an auditable result:

Estimate the total cost of this event.
1) Put each cost in a table.
2) Show the formula and final arithmetic.
3) Check that quantities and units match.
4) Flag assumptions instead of inventing missing prices.

The visible plan, formula, sources, or checklist is what you can evaluate. A long confident explanation can still be wrong, so “show more reasoning” is not the same as “prove it.”

• Comparing options with several constraints
• Planning a project with dependencies
• Checking calculations, summaries, or recommendations

Models may produce a polished rationale after guessing. Do not treat length as evidence. For important work, verify facts with reliable sources, recalculate numbers, and test whether the final answer follows every constraint.

Take one vague task and rewrite it as three checkable stages. Ask for a concise rationale and one verification checklist, then inspect the checklist yourself.