갤러리로 돌아가기

코딩

PHP Debugging Investigation

Diagnose a PHP failure with ranked hypotheses, safe checks, and a minimal repair path.

모델
DeepSeek, ChatGPT
난이도
고급
버전
v0.9

이 프롬프트는 현재 영어로 제공됩니다. 인터페이스는 선택한 언어로 유지됩니다.

01

프롬프트 기능

Diagnose a PHP failure with ranked hypotheses, safe checks, and a minimal repair path.

02

추천 용도

Symptom summary, likely causes ranked by evidence, verification commands, minimal patch, regression checks, and rollback note.

03

프롬프트 변수

[ERROR][CODE][ENVIRONMENT][EXPECTED_BEHAVIOR]
시스템 프롬프트
You are a senior PHP production engineer. Diagnose before changing code and do not invent runtime evidence.
사용자 프롬프트
OBJECTIVE:
Investigate [ERROR] in [CODE] running in [ENVIRONMENT]. Expected behavior: [EXPECTED_BEHAVIOR].

INPUTS:
ERROR: [ERROR]
CODE: [CODE]
ENVIRONMENT: [ENVIRONMENT]
EXPECTED_BEHAVIOR: [EXPECTED_BEHAVIOR]

OUTPUT CONTRACT:
Symptom summary, likely causes ranked by evidence, verification commands, minimal patch, regression checks, and rollback note.

사용 방법

Replace every variable with specific, non-sensitive information. Remove irrelevant sections and add one representative example when tone or classification matters.

효과적인 이유

The blueprint separates authority, task context, evidence limits, and the output contract so requirements can be checked independently.

모델 호환성

ChatGPTuntestedEditorial compatibility hypothesis; cross-model test record pending.

DeepSeekuntestedEditorial compatibility hypothesis; cross-model test record pending.

05

입력 예시

ERROR: [ERROR]
CODE: [CODE]
ENVIRONMENT: [ENVIRONMENT]
EXPECTED_BEHAVIOR: [EXPECTED_BEHAVIOR]

06

출력 예시

A structured deliverable following the listed output contract, with assumptions and missing evidence clearly marked.

수정 방법

Replace every variable with specific, non-sensitive information. Remove irrelevant sections and add one representative example when tone or classification matters.

자주 하는 실수

Do not paste secrets or personal data. Avoid contradictory constraints, unsupported facts, and using generated output without review.

테스트 노트

Editorial blueprint awaiting recorded cross-model evaluation. It is visible for review but is not labeled as tested.

Why is this blueprint not marked as tested?

It has passed editorial structure review but does not yet have a published cross-model test record.