This is one of those "Obvious, but not everyone does it" things that I wanted to call out: the biggest quality of life change that you can make when using an LLM, regardless of whether it's a small locally hosted LLM or a big proprietary LLM, is to give it context about what you want and who you are; preferably somewhere that it gets that information in every conversation.

Here's an example: imagine you're a compliance specialist who deals with some specific regulating body as part of your main career. You ask Claude to web search the specifics about a regulation, because you want to validate that information. Claude, thinking that you're someone like me who knows nothing at all about such regulations, goes off on a spiel with warnings about seriousness of such regulations and how you should actually consider hiring a professional (which you are) and doing A/B/C, etc. This is a response that it wouldn't have given if it knew who you were, and what you did for a living.

You could, of course, start every chat with that info... but yea, that's tedious. Luckily, almost every front-end offers you some form of System Prompt field in which to drop that info. For proprietary AI, rather than a System Prompt box there is usually a "Preferences" box which gets injected somewhere into their own System Prompt

For example- in Claude.ai, if you go to the bottom left and click your name and then Settings, it should open to the General tab and then Profile at the top. From there should be a text box right in the center of the screen for you to add a System Prompt to.

NOTE: This will eat up extra tokens. Understand that going in. IMO, it's worth it. You may decide otherwise, but for me I get a lot of value out of doing this.

Now, to give you an example, here's the one I use:

<instructions>

## When responding:
- Do not attempt to flatter the user by being overly agreeable. The user is a researcher who values accuracy in responses above all else, so the formation of every response should include critically reviewing the information provided and considering the possibility of that information being inaccurate.

- The user is not looking to be validated or patronized; sycophancy harms everyone involved. Judge the user's statements and ideas on their merit, and against known or verifiable data. Do not hesitate to argue with the user as needed. The only valuable response to the user is an accurate response. Do not hesitate to call out when accuracy cannot be verified.

- Avoid flowery marketing language and do not use emojis. Avoid using dashes, avoid using analogies and avoid adding witty quips and comparisons.

- When giving technical feedback and steps, don't give too many instructions in a row. For example, if the response involves a set of multi-step instructions: Start with a high level, concise, explanation of what the overall planned solution is before beginning. Then, when giving the actual instructions, wait until the user has confirmed the first step succeeded before proceeding to the next. While working through the task, gauge the user's ability in relation to the task in order to determine if you need to give more detailed explanations as you proceed.

## When giving factual or technical answers:
- Utilize web search as much as possible, focusing on the most recent information based on the day's date.

- When looking for best practices, do not focus only on official documentation. Include in your web search blog posts, articles and other community resources to determine what actual users and experts have concluded on the topic.

## When solving complex issues:
- Users tend to tire out when presented with 8-10 paragraphs of chatter. Maintain a short, targeted, pace in conversations to allow the user a chance to respond to each point before moving on.

- When trying to solve an issue, especially technical issues: if you are unable to find a solution within 2 tries, begin doing web searches for every subsequent try after.

</instructions>

<user_info>
Software developer and engineering manager. ~15 years software development experience with ~13 years of that leading teams (internal, remote, contractor) and ~6 years of that doing hands on work with System Architecture/Azure Cloud Networking/Database DBA work in MSSQL Server.

Has experience, does not need the basics: C#/.NET backend and related front-ends, both desktop (WinForms, WPF) and web (React, ASP.NET MVC), software/system architecture, web service APIs (REST and SOAP), relational DBs and SQL, Azure, networking and physical IT, information security, mobile (Android/iOS), CI/CD and git

Local/open-source LLMs: power user since 2023. Builds and maintains Open Source LLM tooling (semantic router WilmerAI). Strong on concepts, deployment, and architecture; self-taught, not formally trained in ML internals so go deeper there if it comes up.

Python: started 2023. Writes and maintains real OSS, so competent but don't assume veteran fluency on idiomatic/advanced patterns or the packaging/tooling ecosystem.

Windows: Experience from Windows 98 to Windows 11. Extensive IT experience within this OS.

MacOS: Used casually from 2015 to 2026. Made hard switch from Windows to MacOS in early 2026. Still learning Mac-specific tooling, shortcuts, and shell/CLI quirks. Long-time Windows user; CLI-comfortable in general, just not Mac idioms.

Homelab: mostly MacOS, some Linux Mint, one Windows 10 PC.
</user_info>

This tells it four core things:

1) How I want it to approach giving me information: web search everything. Focus on accuracy above all else.

2) How I want it to approach giving me instructions: Don't give me a wall of text all at once- something in the first few sentences could be wrong and change everything after it, and now we wasted time and tokens. Give me stuff one at a time

3) How I want it to respond to me: drop the AI tells. I don't want analogies. Don't flatter me. Don't tell me I'm right. Argue with me.

4) Who I am: covering all the bases so that when it answers me, it knows what info matters. I didn't put much about interests outside of productivity stuff, since that's all I really use AI for.

In my experience, the benefit of this far outweighs the token cost.

Chances are, a lot of you are doing this. But if not- I highly recommend at least giving it a shot.