Disclaimer: Swantide is a generative AI platform, therefore it may be inaccurate, incomplete, or not applicable. The output from Swantide is based on the inputs provided by the user, and any content generated by Swantide must be thoroughly reviewed and verified by you prior to use. Do not implement, rely on, or act on AI-generated output without first confirming its accuracy and suitability for your specific needs.
Consider these best practices when writing prompts for the Swantide AI Assistant:
Provide Swantide with Clear Context To help Swantide generate the most accurate and useful responses, include as much context as possible in your prompt. Clarifying your intent and expected output ensures that Swantide can tailor its response to meet your specific needs.
Example Scenario:
You need to change one of the values in Opportunity.StageName from “Negotiating” to “Proposal.” As part of this update, you want to review related metadata components to identify whether any reference the “Negotiating” stage value.
Bad Prompt:
“Tell me about the timestamp flow on opportunity.”
This prompt is too vague—it doesn’t specify which flow you’re referring to or what information you need. Without that clarity, Swantide may return incomplete or unrelated information.
Better Prompt:
“Tell me about the Swantide_Timestamp_Changed_to_Outcome_Validation_on_Update flow. I’m modifying the Opportunity.StageName value from ‘Negotiating’ to ‘Proposal’ and need to understand whether any part of this flow needs to be updated as a result.”
By clearly stating the specific component, the change being made, and the purpose of your inquiry, Swantide can provide a more relevant and actionable response.
Tip:
You can also specify how you’d like the response to be structured. For example, if you’re asking Swantide to write a user story or technical design document, include details about the desired format or required sections.
Reference specific component names if possible. As noted earlier, the Swantide AI Assistant retains approximately 10 metadata components as context within a given conversation thread. When asking questions about specific components, reference them by API name whenever possible.
Doing so greatly increases the likelihood that Swantide identifies and includes the correct component in its response or documentation.
This practice is especially important in large Salesforce orgs (e.g., with more than 50,000 metadata components) where:
The volume of metadata makes context selection more complex.
Multiple components may share similar or repeated labels (for example, Case, Type, or Status).
By being explicit with API names, you help Swantide provide more accurate, relevant, and complete answers.
Bad Prompt: “Tell me about the flow on lead conversion”.
Better Prompt: “Tell me about the ‘Auto_Convert_Lead_from_Conditions_with_New_Opportunity. I’m particularly interested in the entry criteria and how it interacts with the Opportunity.StageName field’
Note that if you don’t know the name of the component you are asking about, Swantide can still be helpful in identifying the name of the component. If you don’t know, you can start by trying to identify the component, and then ask follow ups with the specific API names. Example:
“What flow is responsible for ensuring opportunities are automatically created based on certain lead status values?” Then, as a follow up: “Tell me more about the Auto Convert Lead from Conditions with New Opportunity flow”
Ask follow up questions to dive deeper on a topic. Expect that Swantide will write about a page of output for 1 prompt. If you want more output or to go deeper, start with a broad question and ask follow up questions. Take the example from above, as a follow up, ask “Tell me more about the logic used in the Contact Matching and Conversion Path steps described above”
Start new threads for new topics.
Swantide retains documentation for about 10 metadata components within a single conversation thread. It keeps that context available for follow-up questions, so if you begin by asking about a specific Flow, your subsequent questions can refer to that flow more generally without needing to restate the API name each time.
However, because the initial context is preserved within a thread, it’s important to start a new thread when shifting to a different topic. Doing so ensures that Swantide has the right context to answer your new question accurately and prevents the response from being influenced by unrelated information.
Keep the scope of prompts and the prompt length to a manageable amount
Bad Prompts: “Tell me all the flows that update Opportunity.StageName”, “Tell me all the differences between all of the profiles in this org”, “Review all apex classes in this org and identify those with security vulnerabilities
Additionally, don’t copy and paste a 50 page document and ask Swantide to summarize. That is likely too long, if you are copy/pasting other resources as context, try to keep it to about 1 page.
Better Prompts:
First, find the flows that reference Opportunity.StageName in the data dictionary, in the references tab. Then, ask specific questions about the flows you want to understand more about.
“Tell me the difference between Profile X and Profile Y in the permissions they grant on the Opportunity object”
“Tell me about the SendBetterEmail apex class. Are there any security vulnerabilities in this class? If so, can you provide suggestions to remediate them?”