The most underrated prompt technique is asking the model to disagree with you before it helps you

Most prompts are structured around getting an answer. You describe what you want, the model produces it.

The problem is that by the time you're writing the prompt, you've already half-decided what you want. The model picks up on that framing and confirms it.

The technique I've gotten the most mileage from is flipping the sequence:

Before you answer, steelman the opposite position. What would someone argue against this? What am I missing or assuming? Then give me your actual take.

What this does structurally: it forces the model to generate the counter-argument before it's already committed to a direction. You get real friction instead of token friction the model genuinely working through the opposing view, not just adding a disclaimer.

Works especially well for:

Decisions where you're already leaning one way

Prompts where you've provided a lot of context that frames the answer

Any creative brief where "yes and" is the path of least resistance

The deeper principle: ambiguity in a prompt gets resolved in the direction of your framing. Adding explicit disagreement permission breaks that gravity before the output forms.