Best ChatGPT Prompts for Coding

Updated January 2026 · 8 min read

Coding is one of the highest-value uses of AI — and one of the easiest to do badly. "Fix my code" gets you nothing useful. These six templates consistently work with ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini.

Why most coding prompts fail

The model doesn't know your language version, framework, style guide, or constraints. Without those, it guesses. And when it guesses, you spend more time correcting the output than you'd have spent writing it yourself.

Template 1 — Debugging

Give the model the error, the code, and what you expected.

Language: Python 3.12 with FastAPI Expected: endpoint returns 200 with a JSON list of users Actual: 500 error, traceback below Constraints: keep the current route signature Error: [Stack trace] Code: [Your code]

The magic is in "expected vs actual" — it forces the model to diagnose, not just rewrite.

Template 2 — Code review

Ask for specific concerns, not general feedback. Otherwise you get a summary that says "looks good overall".

Review this function for: 1. Correctness (off-by-one, null handling) 2. Performance (nested loops, unnecessary allocations) 3. Readability (naming, structure) 4. Security (injection, unsafe casts) Format: numbered list, one issue per item, with a suggested fix. Do not rewrite the whole function. [Your code]

Template 3 — Architecture decisions

For "should I use X or Y" questions, always ask for tradeoffs and a recommendation, not just a list.

I'm building [brief description]. Scale: ~10k users, mostly reads, low write volume. Team: 2 engineers, familiar with TypeScript. Compare Postgres vs DynamoDB for the primary data store. Output: a table with columns Pros, Cons, Cost at this scale, Operational complexity. Then recommend one and explain why in 2 sentences.

Template 4 — Writing tests

Specify the framework and the level of coverage you want. Otherwise you get a single happy-path test.

Write tests for this function using Jest. Cover: - Happy path - Empty input - Invalid type - Boundary value (0, negative, very large) Include a brief comment above each test explaining what it verifies. Do not add tests for internal helper functions. [Your function]

Template 5 — Refactoring

Name the target — readability, performance, testability — or the model picks arbitrarily.

Refactor this function to improve readability. Goal: reduce nesting to max 2 levels and extract pure helpers. Constraints: same public signature, same behavior, no new dependencies. Show the refactored code and a 3-bullet summary of what changed. [Your code]

Template 6 — Explaining unfamiliar code

Ask for the "why", not a line-by-line translation. You can read the code; you need the intent.

Explain what this code does and why it's structured this way. I'm familiar with [language]. Assume I know the syntax. Focus on: what problem it solves, why these design choices, and any non-obvious side effects. Skip line-by-line explanation. [Code]

The pattern behind all six

Every template above has the same 4 parts:

Context — language, framework, scale, constraints
Goal — debug, review, refactor, explain, generate
Format — table, list, code + summary
Boundaries — what not to do

Once you notice that shape, you can write a good prompt for any coding task in under a minute.

Faster: let Epromptly write them for you

If you want to skip the setup, Epromptly has a "Coding" target built in. Paste your rough request — "help me debug this FastAPI error" — and it rewrites it into one of the templates above automatically.

Free, no signup, works with ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini.

Turn "fix my code" into a real prompt

Pick "Coding" as your target and paste your rough idea. Epromptly does the rest.

✨ Try it free