CCARF Practice Question

Paper 5 · Question 18

D4 Prompt Engineering & Structured Output · Paper 5

[Scenario: Claude Code for Continuous Integration] Your automated review analyzes comments and docstrings. The current prompt instructs Claude to “check that comments are accurate and up to date.” Findings often flag acceptable patterns (TODO markers, simple descriptions) while missing comments describing behavior the code no longer implements. What change addresses the root cause of this inconsistent analysis? What change addresses the root cause?

• A.Include `git blame` data so Claude can identify comments that predate recent code changes.
• B.Add few-shot examples of misleading comments to help the model recognize similar patterns in the codebase.
• C.Filter TODO, FIXME, and descriptive comment patterns before analysis to reduce noise.
• D.Specify explicit criteria: flag comments only when the behavior they claim contradicts the code’s actual behavior.

Show answer & explanations

Correct answer: D

A: git blame shows age, not whether the comment's claim matches the code. An old comment can still be true.

B: Examples help recognition, but the prompt still only says to check that comments are accurate and up to date.

C: Dropping TODO and FIXME cuts some noise and still misses comments that describe behaviour the code no longer has.

D: Explicit criteria—flagging comments only when claimed behavior contradicts actual code behavior—directly addresses the root cause by replacing a vague instruction with a precise definition of what constitutes a problem. This reduces false positives on acceptable patterns and misses of truly misleading comments.

Related Prompt Engineering & Structured Output questions

More: Paper 5 · All practice questions