Overview
Write Better Prompts. Get Better Answers.
Prompt engineering is the practice of asking clear, well-structured questions that help the USC Research Administration Navigator understand exactly what you need. Better prompts lead to responses that are more accurate, relevant, and actionable.
This guide is designed for Principal Investigators (PIs), Research Administrators, department leadership, research support staff, and personnel across USC’s central research administration and compliance offices. Rather than providing prompts to copy and paste, it teaches practical techniques you can apply to almost any research administration question.
Whether you’re preparing a proposal, managing an award, navigating compliance requirements, or resolving a post-award issue, a well-written prompt helps the USC RA Navigator provide guidance that is tailored to your specific situation.
Important Notice
The USC Research Administration Navigator is designed to support research administration by helping users understand institutional processes, sponsor requirements, policies, and administrative workflows.
While the USC RA Navigator can provide valuable guidance, it does not replace:
- USC policies or procedures
- Sponsor requirements
- Institutional review or approvals
- Regulatory committee determinations
- Professional judgment
Some questions require review, approval, or formal determination by the appropriate institutional office or oversight committee. The USC RA Navigator can help explain the process and prepare you for these requirements, but it cannot replace official institutional review or decision-making.
Always verify guidance before taking action when decisions could affect compliance, funding, financial reporting, or sponsor obligations.
How the USC Research Administration Navigator “Thinks”
The USC Research Administration Navigator works best when it understands your research administration context before attempting to answer your question.
Instead of looking for a single keyword, it considers information such as:
- your role (PI, Research Administrator, department administrator, etc.)
- the stage of the research lifecycle
- the sponsor or funding agency
- the type of research being conducted
- applicable compliance requirements
- the administrative task you are trying to complete
Providing this information upfront allows the USC RA Navigator to retrieve guidance that is more relevant to your situation and identify important approvals, dependencies, or next steps that may not be obvious from a short question.
Think of your prompt as providing the background that an experienced research administrator would ask for before offering advice.
Why Good Prompts Matter
The quality of an AI response depends largely on the information provided in the prompt.
Consider these two questions:
Less Effective Prompt:
“How do I submit an NIH proposal?”
More Effective Prompt:
“I am a new Principal Investigator preparing my first NIH R01 proposal at USC. The project involves human subjects research. Please explain the proposal preparation and routing process, identify the required institutional reviews, and summarize the major submission steps before routing the proposal through USC.”
The second prompt gives the USC RA Navigator enough context to understand:
- who you are
- where you are in the research lifecycle
- which sponsor is involved
- which compliance requirements may apply
- exactly what type of answer you want
As a result, the response is likely to be more complete, more relevant, and better aligned with your specific situation.
The CRAFT Prompt Formula
The CRAFT Prompt Formula provides a simple framework for writing clear, effective prompts. By including the right information up front, you can help the USC RA Navigator generate more accurate, relevant, and actionable responses.
Start with Your Situation
Context tells the USC RA Navigator who you are and what you're working on before you ask your question.
Even a brief description of your role, sponsor, research project, or current challenge helps the USC RA Navigator tailor its response to your specific situation instead of providing a generic answer.
Good context often includes information such as:
- Your role (Principal Investigator, Research Administrator, Department Administrator, etc.)
- The sponsor (NIH, NSF, DOE, foundation, industry, etc.)
- The type of project (research, clinical trial, training grant, fellowship, etc.)
- Whether the project is new or existing
- Relevant compliance considerations (human subjects, animal research, biosafety, export controls, etc.)
Original Prompt
"How do I submit an NIH proposal?"
Revised Prompt
"I am a new Principal Investigator preparing my first NIH R01 proposal at USC. My project involves human subjects research , and I am beginning proposal preparation. How do I prepare and submit my proposal through USC?"
Why It Works
The revised prompt gives the USC RA Navigator important background information before asking the question.
Instead of assuming your situation, it understands:
- your role
- your experience level
- the sponsor
- the type of research
- where you are in the process
That additional context helps produce guidance that is more accurate, relevant, and tailored to your needs.
Quick Tip
💡When possible, begin your prompt with one or two sentences describing your situation before asking your question.
Describe What You're Trying to Do
Research administration spans the entire sponsored project lifecycle—from identifying funding opportunities through proposal development, award management, reporting, and closeout.
Many questions can have different answers depending on where you are in that lifecycle.
Describing the activity you're working on helps the USC RA Navigator provide guidance appropriate for that stage of the process.
Examples include:
- Preparing a proposal
- Developing a budget
- Routing a proposal
- Responding to Just-in-Time (JIT) requests
- Negotiating an award
- Managing an active award
- Completing effort certification
- Preparing an RPPR
- Closing out an award
Original Prompt
"I am a new Principal Investigator preparing my first NIH R01 proposal at USC. The project involves human subjects research. How do I submit my proposal?"
Revised Prompt
"I am a new Principal Investigator preparing my first NIH R01 proposal at USC. My project involves human subjects research. I am currently preparing my proposal for internal routing and sponsor submission. Please explain the proposal preparation and routing process, identify any institutional reviews that should be completed before submission, and summarize the major next steps"
Why It Works
The revised prompt explains what activity is taking place, not just the overall topic.
Because the USC RA Navigator knows you are preparing for proposal routing—not managing an awarded project or responding to sponsor requests—it can focus on the guidance that is most relevant to that stage of the research lifecycle.
Providing the activity also helps the USC RA Navigator identify related approvals, dependencies, and common issues that users often encounter.
Clearly State What You Need
Once you've provided context, tell the USC RA Navigator exactly what you want it to do.
Specific requests produce more focused and actionable responses than broad questions.
Instead of asking a general question, identify the information, explanation, comparison, or guidance you need.
Examples include:
- Explain a process
- Compare two options
- Summarize a policy
- Review a budget
- Identify required approvals
- Recommend next steps
- Create a checklist
- Draft a response
- Explain sponsor requirements
- Identify potential compliance considerations
Original Prompt
"I am a new Principal Investigator preparing my first NIH R01 proposal at USC. My project involves human subjects research. I am preparing the proposal for internal routing and sponsor submission. How do I submit my proposal?"
Revised Prompt
"I am a new Principal Investigator preparing my first NIH R01 proposal at USC. My project involves human subjects research. I am preparing the proposal for internal routing and sponsor submission. Please explain the proposal submission process, identify the institutional reviews that should be completed before routing, and summarize the major steps required before sponsor submission."
Why It Works
The revised prompt gives the USC RA Navigator a clear objective instead of leaving it to guess what information you need.
Rather than generating a broad overview, the USC RA Navigator can focus on:
- the proposal submission process
- institutional reviews
- required approvals
- the next administrative steps
This results in a response that is more organized and immediately useful.
Ask for More Than Just an Answer
The USC RA Navigator can often provide additional information that helps you make better administrative decisions.
Consider asking it to identify:
- Required approvals
- Responsible USC office(s)
- Sponsor requirements
- Missing information needed to answer your question
- Common pitfalls
- Compliance considerations
- Recommended next steps
For example:
Explain the process, identify any required approvals, summarize common mistakes, and recommend the next administrative steps.
These additions often make the response far more valuable with only a few extra words.
Tell the Co-Pilot How You Want the Response Organized
The same information can be presented in many different ways.
Specifying a format helps the USC RA Navigator organize its response in a way that is easier to read and use.
Common formats include:
- Step-by-step instructions
- Checklist
- Bullet list
- Table
- Comparison chart
- Timeline
- Decision tree
- Executive summary
- Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Draft email or memo
Original Prompt
"Please explain the proposal submission process, identify the institutional reviews that should be completed before routing, and summarize the major steps required before sponsor submission."
Revised Prompt
"Please explain the proposal submission process. Present the answer as a step-by-step checklist, identify the responsible USC office for each major step, and include common mistakes that could delay submission."
Why It Works
Specifying the format improves readability and makes the information easier to apply.
Instead of receiving several paragraphs of text, you'll receive information organized in a way that supports the task you're trying to complete.
Quick Tip
💡If you're unsure what format to request, ask for:
Present the answer as a checklist with recommended next steps.
This works well for many research administration questions.
Identify Who the Response Is For
Sometimes the information itself isn't enough—the way it's written matters too.
Tell the USC RA Navigator who will use the information or what you plan to do with it.
Examples include:
- A Principal Investigator
- A new Research Administrator
- Department leadership
- A study team
- A sponsor
- An internal training document
- A meeting summary
- An email
- A presentation
- A standard operating procedure (SOP)
Original Prompt
"Please explain the proposal submission process. Present the answer as a step-by-step checklist."
Revised Prompt
"Please explain the proposal submission process. Present the answer as a step-by-step checklist written for a new Principal Investigator with limited experience preparing sponsored research proposals."
Why It Works
The intended audience influences the level of detail, terminology, and writing style.
For example:
- A new Principal Investigator may need additional explanation and definitions.
- An experienced Research Administrator may prefer a concise operational checklist.
- Department leadership may want only a high-level summary and key risks.
Specifying the audience helps the Co-Pilot tailor the response to your needs.
The Complete CRAFT Prompt Example
By combining all five elements, you provide the USC RA Navigator with the information it needs to generate a response that is accurate, relevant, and actionable.
Example
“I am a new Principal Investigator preparing my first NIH R01 proposal at USC. My project involves human subjects research, and I am preparing the proposal for internal routing and sponsor submission. Please explain the proposal preparation and routing process, identify the required institutional reviews, summarize common issues that delay proposals, and recommend the next administrative steps. Present the response as a step-by-step checklist written for a new Principal Investigator.”
Why This Prompt Works
This prompt tells the USC RA Navigator:
- Context: Who you are and your situation.
- Research Activity: Where you are in the research lifecycle.
- Ask: Exactly what information you need.
- Format: How the response should be organized.
- Target: Who the response is intended for.
Providing these details helps the USC RA Navigator deliver guidance that is more specific, easier to apply, and better aligned with your research administration needs.
Build on the Conversation
The first response isn’t always the final answer.
One advantage of using the USC Research Administration Navigator is that you can ask follow-up questions to clarify, expand, or refine the information you’ve already received.
Instead of writing a completely new prompt, continue the conversation by asking the USC RA Navigator to explain a topic in more detail, simplify a response, compare options, or focus on a specific issue.
Examples of Helpful Follow-Up Prompts
- Explain that in more detail.
- Give me a checklist I can follow.
- Summarize this for a Principal Investigator.
- Rewrite this as an email to my department.
- Compare NIH and NSF requirements.
- Explain what happens after proposal routing.
- What information is still missing before this question can be answered?
- What are the most common mistakes in this process?
Each follow-up helps the USC RA Navigator provide guidance that is more focused on your specific needs.
Ask for Sources and Supporting Guidance
For important administrative decisions, ask the USC RA Navigator to explain the basis for its recommendations.
This can help you understand whether the response is based on:
- USC guidance
- Sponsor requirements
- Federal regulations
- General research administration best practices
Knowing where guidance comes from helps you determine whether additional review or institutional approval may be needed.
Example
Instead of asking:
“Can I rebudget equipment funds?:
Try asking:
“Explain whether this rebudgeting is generally allowable, identify whether sponsor approval may be required, distinguish between USC guidance and sponsor requirements, and summarize any important considerations before proceeding.”
Why It Works
This prompt encourages the USC RA Navigator to explain its reasoning instead of providing only a conclusion.
For higher-risk questions, understanding why something may or may not be appropriate is often just as valuable as the answer itself.
Help the USC RA Navigator Help You
Sometimes the most important information is what hasn’t been provided.
If your prompt is missing key details, the USC RA Navigator may need additional information before it can provide meaningful guidance.
Rather than guessing, ask it to identify what information is still needed.
Example
What additional information would you need before making a recommendation?
or
What assumptions are you making based on my prompt?
These questions help ensure that important details are not overlooked.
Why It Works
Research administration questions often depend on factors such as:
- sponsor
- award terms
- project stage
- funding mechanism
- institutional approvals
- compliance requirements
Identifying missing information early usually leads to more accurate guidance.
Know When AI Shouldn’t Make the Decision
The USC Research Administration Navigator can explain policies, summarize processes, identify likely next steps, and help prepare documentation.
However, some decisions require institutional review or formal approval.
However, some decisions require institutional review or formal approval.
Examples include:
- IRB determinations
- IACUC protocol approvals
- Export control determinations
- Financial Conflict of Interest reviews
- Authorized institutional signatures
- Sponsor approvals
- Official interpretations of award terms
For these situations, the USC RA Navigator can help you prepare for the process, explain what to expect, and identify the appropriate USC office—but it cannot replace the required institutional review or approval.
Example
Instead of asking:
“Does my study qualify for exempt IRB review?”
Consider asking:
“Based on my study description, what factors are typically considered when determining whether research may qualify for exempt review, what additional information would be needed, and what should I prepare before submitting to the HRPP?”
This approach helps you prepare for institutional review without asking the USC RA Navigator to make a determination that only the appropriate review office can make.
Final Checklist Before You Submit Your Prompt
A quick self-check can often improve the quality of the response.
Ask yourself:
✔ Have I described my situation?
✔ Have I explained where I am in the research lifecycle?
✔ Have I clearly stated what I want?
✔ Have I requested the format I need?
✔ Have I identified who the response is for?
✔ Have I included any important sponsor or compliance information?
✔ Have I asked for next steps or required approvals if appropriate?
If you answered “yes” to most of these questions, your prompt will usually produce a more useful response.