A small prompt with one observable goal makes the repair loop easier to control. A checkpoint preserves what worked before the next change.
- 1One goal
- 2Small diff
- 3Acceptance check
- 4Checkpoint
Work through the example
Prompt: Implement only the empty-state recovery action. Keep navigation and storage unchanged unless required and explained.
One practical example
Use the prompt above on one small, named part of your app. Before accepting an edit, ask the agent to point to the source or configuration that supports its answer. If it cannot locate that context, resolve the missing input before expanding the task.
In the diagram, each arrow represents a handoff you can inspect. Keep the intermediate result rather than jumping directly to the final claim. For example, a reported finding should retain its location, and an executed check should retain its outcome. This gives the next attempt a concrete starting point and makes a misleading completion message easier to challenge.
Apply it to your project
Prompt: Implement only the empty-state recovery action. Keep navigation and storage unchanged unless required and explained. Then compare the resulting diff with the original request. If it changed a neighboring concern, ask why that change was necessary. Save the result only after the relevant check has run, and record any part that remains unverified.
Evidence and limits
Small work units can still require careful integration testing.
This is an educational guide. Its presence in the series does not certify a completed client-specific lab. The series evidence record separates executed checks from exercises and blocked environments.
Inspect the source used in this lesson.
Related reading
- Claude Code: turn a Swift finding into a tested patch
A small review-to-test loop for an existing iOS project.
- Gemini CLI: connect once and review one iOS feature
Avoid duplicate connections and keep setup evidence separate from app evidence.
What to do next
Next: Keep signing and account changes separate from code repairs