Claude prompt for code generation: Security Review (With Examples)
Claude · Code Generation · With Examples
You are a hands-on practitioner using Claude for code generation, specifically security review.
Job: threat notes on a snippet.
Audience: appsec. Constraint: owasp lens.
Working style: practical. Optimize for few-shot samples and before/after pairs.
Process:
1. Restate the brief in one sentence and list missing facts as questions.
2. Draft the artifact.
3. Stress-test it against the constraint.
4. Return a final version plus 3 numbered improvements.
Output contract: use headings, short paragraphs, and concrete examples. No filler. No invented statistics.
If information is missing, make the smallest reasonable assumption and label it.A strong Claude code generation security review prompt names the job, audience, and finish line. This page does that for appsec. Most failed runs trace back to missing audience or success criteria — this prompt adds both. The with examples version uses practical language and targets few-shot samples and before/after pairs.
When to use this prompt
Picture a appsec professional opening Claude with one job: security review. Without "owasp lens", answers drift. This page prevents that drift. Swap only nouns when adapting — keep the process intact.
Why this prompt works
- Forces an output contract: headings, examples, and a final version.
- Centers threat notes on a snippet so success is observable.
- Locks the audience (appsec) before style so tone stays honest.
- Asks for a self-check pass, which cuts hallucinated details.
- The with examples angle adds few-shot samples and before/after pairs without extra fluff.
How to use it in Claude
When appsec review output, they should see few-shot samples and before/after pairs without hunting for it. Add one real example from your last week of work so the model mirrors your domain. If the first answer is vague, reply with the constraint again: owasp lens. Save the winning variant for security review — teams with a short library ship faster. Functions, refactors, tests, and architecture sketches. Keep that context in the thread when you iterate.
Have Claude list assumptions about code generation before drafting. Delete any you cannot defend. For security review in code generation, the failure mode is usually missing constraint. This prompt blocks that by design — especially "owasp lens". Expect two minutes customizing and two minutes editing for With Examples output. Anthropic models still need your facts for security review; they cannot invent metrics or brand rules. developers teams bookmark slug security-review-examples when few-shot samples and before/after pairs matters.
Step-by-step
- Open Claude and paste the prompt block unchanged.
- Replace placeholders with your project facts (appsec, offer, timeline).
- Confirm the constraint is still visible: owasp lens.
- Because this is the With Examples variant, prioritize few-shot samples and before/after pairs over length.
- Reply with one fix list, then regenerate the final version only.
Example output
Example output shape: H1 with Security Review, 3 short sections, bullet list of recommendations, closing line that states owasp lens. Facts you supply appear; nothing invented.
Common mistakes
- Deleting "owasp lens" to save space — that is usually the whole point.
- Skipping the audience (appsec) and hoping Claude infers it.
- Using the With Examples prompt but editing it into a vague one-liner.
Expert notes
Practitioners choose With Examples when security review needs few-shot samples and before/after pairs. Claude from Anthropic still needs your facts — especially for owasp lens.
For code generation, compare this With Examples prompt against the Quick Start and Expert angles on the same use case. Keep the structure that scores higher on threat notes on a snippet.
Comparison / variations
| Approach | When | Tweak |
|---|---|---|
| Bare request | You only need a spark | Write a security review piece. |
| This prompt | You need a usable draft | Role, constraint, steps, and output contract included. |
| Plus examples | Voice must match yours | Paste 120 words of your writing or a still you like, then rerun in Claude. |
Key takeaways
- State the job (threat notes on a snippet) in one line before any style talk.
- Keep owasp lens visible in the prompt, not only in your head.
- Document what changed when you customized slug security-review-examples.
- Claude improves when you paste a real snippet or reference still.
- Code Generation work needs functions, refactors, tests, and architecture sketches.
FAQ
- What is a Claude prompt for security review?
- It is a structured brief that tells Claude how to produce code generation output for appsec. This with examples version stresses few-shot samples and before/after pairs and keeps "owasp lens" in the instructions.
- How do I customize this Claude code generation prompt?
- Swap project nouns, paste one real example, and leave the process steps intact. The constraint "owasp lens" should stay unless your brief truly changed.
- Why use the with examples angle for security review?
- Different angles solve different failures. With Examples helps when appsec need few-shot samples and before/after pairs. It is not longer for its own sake — each line has a job.
- Is this Claude prompt updated for 2026?
- Yes. Pages follow our SEO Bible, refresh on a rolling schedule, and include current best practices for Anthropic models. Always verify facts before client delivery.