An automated linting and repair tool finds 3.46% of developer prompts biased, 10.75% injection-vulnerable, and improves a fraction of suboptimal prompts.
PromptSet: A Programmer's Prompting Dataset
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
The rise of capabilities expressed by large language models has been quickly followed by the integration of the same complex systems into application level logic. Algorithms, programs, systems, and companies are built around structured prompting to black box models where the majority of the design and implementation lies in capturing and quantifying the `agent mode'. The standard way to shape a closed language model is to prime it for a specific task with a tailored prompt, often initially handwritten by a human. The textual prompts co-evolve with the codebase, taking shape over the course of project life as artifacts which must be reviewed and maintained, just as the traditional code files might be. Unlike traditional code, we find that prompts do not receive effective static testing and linting to prevent runtime issues. In this work, we present a novel dataset called PromptSet, with more than 61,000 unique developer prompts used in open source Python programs. We perform analysis on this dataset and introduce the notion of a static linter for prompts. Released with this publication is a HuggingFace dataset and a Github repository to recreate collection and processing efforts, both under the name \texttt{pisterlabs/promptset}.
citation-role summary
citation-polarity summary
fields
cs.SE 1years
2025 1verdicts
CONDITIONAL 1roles
dataset 1polarities
unclear 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
An Empirically-grounded tool for Automatic Prompt Linting and Repair: A Case Study on Bias, Vulnerability, and Optimization in Developer Prompts
An automated linting and repair tool finds 3.46% of developer prompts biased, 10.75% injection-vulnerable, and improves a fraction of suboptimal prompts.