Recovery by Failure Type
Hallucinated Facts
The AI confidently states something that is not true. This is the most common and most dangerous failure.
Detection: If a claim feels too specific, too convenient, or too perfectly aligned with your question — verify it. AI hallucination often looks plausible.
Recovery prompt:
"The statistic you cited about [X] appears to be incorrect. Provide this section again using only verifiable facts. If you are not confident in a specific number, say so rather than inventing one."
Prevention: Add "cite your sources" or "only include facts you are confident about" to your original prompt.
Wrong Format or Structure
The AI produced content but in the wrong format — a paragraph when you wanted bullet points, a list when you wanted a table, prose when you needed JSON.
Recovery prompt:
"Good content, wrong format. Reformat this as [specific format]. Keep all the information, change only the structure."
Prevention: Always specify format explicitly: "Respond as a markdown table with columns: X, Y, Z"
Off-Topic Response
The AI answered a different question than the one you asked, or focused on the wrong aspect.
Recovery prompt:
"That answers a different question. I am asking specifically about [X], not [Y]. Focus only on [X] and ignore [Y] entirely."
Prevention: End prompts with "Focus specifically on [X]" and "Do not discuss [Y]."
Wrong Tone or Register
The output is too formal, too casual, too verbose, or too academic for your needs.
Recovery prompt:
"Same content, different tone. Rewrite this as if explaining to [target audience]. Less [current problem], more [desired quality]."
Prevention: Include "Tone: [specific]" and "Audience: [specific]" in every prompt.
Fundamentally Wrong Approach
The AI took the wrong strategy entirely — wrote a comparison when you needed a how-to, built a class when you needed a function.
Recovery prompt:
"Wrong approach entirely. Do not revise — pivot. I need [describe correct approach] instead of [what it did]. Start fresh on the approach but keep the context we have established."
The Correction Escalation Ladder
When a simple correction does not work, escalate:
| Level | Technique | When to Use |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Nudge | "Adjust X to Y" | Minor issues |
| 2. Redirect | "Focus on A, not B" | Off-topic drift |
| 3. Correct | "X is wrong. The correct answer is Y" | Factual errors |
| 4. Reframe | "Let me rephrase: I need..." | Misunderstood intent |
| 5. Pivot | "Scrap that approach. Instead..." | Wrong strategy |
| 6. Reset context | "Forget the above. New task:" | Conversation poisoned |
| 7. New conversation | Close and start fresh | Unrecoverable mess |
Most failures resolve at Level 1-3. If you reach Level 6, consider whether the original prompt was the problem.
The 60/40 Rule
When evaluating a bad output, ask: is at least 60% of this usable? If yes, recover. If no, pivot or restart.
60%+ usable — correct the rest:
"The structure and first three sections are good. Rewrite sections 4 and 5 — they are [specific problem]."
Under 60% usable — pivot:
"This is not in the right direction. Let me restate what I need: [clear, specific restatement]."
Recovery Prompts That Always Work
These five prompts handle 90% of recovery situations:
- "What you wrote is partially correct. Keep [X, Y] but change [Z] because [reason]."
- "You misunderstood. I need [restate clearly]. Do not include [what went wrong]."
- "Same information, different format: [specify exact format]."
- "This is too [vague/detailed/formal/casual]. Rewrite at [length] in [tone]."
- "Review what you wrote. What are the weakest parts? Fix them."