{
  "id": 17131743,
  "title": "I stopped giving ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini detailed prompts for a week, and one struggled more than I expected",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/10/29/i-stopped-giving-chatgpt-claude-and-gemini-detailed-prompts-for-a",
  "topic": "ai",
  "section": "AI",
  "published": "2026-10-29T21:30:22.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "XDA Developers",
    "slug": "xda-developers",
    "url": "https://www.xda-developers.com/stopped-giving-chatgpt-claude-and-gemini-detailed-prompts-one-struggled-more-than-expected/"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "One common piece of advice for interacting with AI chatbots like ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini involves providing prompters as much context as possible. The rationale behind this is simple - clear instructions ensure the AI delivers exactly what users are seeking. This makes perfect sense when considering how AI models function. However, recent advancements suggest we may not always need to be as specific with our prompts. As AI labs promote the notion that their models possess reasoning skills, can deduce requirements, and independently make decisions, the argument arises whether extensive prompt details are necessary. To test this theory, I decided to experiment for a week. In this experiment, I instructed ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini to tackle five everyday tasks using deliberately vague prompts. The results revealed that one chatbot, Gemini, needed considerably more guidance than the other two. Boris Cherny, the creator of Claude Code, shared his insights on how prompting has evolved with smarter AI models. He pointed out that newer models are capable of making decisions without extensive instructions. However, Cherny emphasized the importance of still providing context, not to avoid micromanaging the AI but to ensure crucial information is included. My experiment further reinforced this notion. While Gemini managed all five tasks, its explanations lacked depth compared to ChatGPT and Claude. For example, when explaining recursion, ChatGPT provided a detailed walkthrough, code example, and interactive question, while Claude offered a concise yet thorough explanation. Gemini, however, relied on simple analogies and explanations without additional aids. Similarly, when choosing between an e-ink tablet and an iPad, Gemini's response provided a basic comparison instead of an interactive decision-making tool. The same pattern emerged in the trip planning task, where Gemini fell short in creating a detailed itinerary. In essence, while newer AI models can handle more, they still require a degree of guidance. The experiment underscores the importance of balancing minimal context with sufficient information to foster a productive interaction with these AI chatbots.",
  "summary": "Do we really need to spoon-feed AI anymore?",
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 2,
    "also_reported_by": [
      {
        "outlet": "Hacker News Best",
        "title": "Claude Code regularly sends each background agent's transcript to its model",
        "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/10/29/claude-code-regularly-sends-each-background-agents-transcript-to-its",
        "published": "2026-10-29T03:33:42.000Z"
      }
    ]
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}