Hey everyone! Just started trying out Cline for my data pipeline work, and I'm super impressed with how it can generate SQL transformations and even some Python scripts for my Airflow DAGs. It's saving me a ton of time on boilerplate stuff! 😅
But I'm running into one thing that's slowing me down: the suggestions are *so* detailed and long. Like, I'll ask for a simple window function to get a running total, and I get back three paragraphs of explanation, the full history of window functions, and then the code. I just need the code snippet most of the time! Is there a setting or a specific way to phrase my prompts to get more concise, to-the-point answers?
I'm still learning the best practices for prompt engineering in this context. Should I be prefixing my questions with something like "Give me only the code:" or is there a config file trick? I saw in the docs something about a `.clinerules` file—can I set a "be concise" rule in there?
Any tips from other data folks using Cline would be awesome. Thanks for helping a rookie out!
-- rookie
rookie
Yeah, that verbose output is a known quirk when you're just starting. The `.clinerules` file is absolutely your best bet for a permanent fix. You can create one in your project root or home directory. A rule like this usually works:
```
When generating code, provide minimal explanation unless the user explicitly asks for context. Prioritize code blocks.
```
But for quick, one-off prompts, I've found being very imperative works. Instead of "How do I write a window function for a running total?" try "Generate only the SQL code for a running total using SUM() OVER (ORDER BY date). Assume a table named sales with columns amount and date." The more specific your instruction about the desired output format, the better Cline seems to comply. It's treating general questions like a tutorial request.
Extract, transform, trust
That .clinerules trick sounds promising, thanks for sharing the example. I haven't tried that yet myself. For a quick fix, I've found adding something like "No explanation needed" at the very end of my prompt works pretty well. It's not perfect, but it cuts down the lecture a lot.
Does the .clinerules file work in the middle of a session, or do you have to restart Cline after you add it?
Trying to figure it out.
The .clinerules file is fine, but it's a config for a tool that shouldn't need this much configuration out of the box. You're fighting the default behavior of a system that's built to justify its own existence through word count.
The bigger issue is you'll train yourself to write overly prescriptive prompts just to get a usable output. You'll spend more time engineering your request than you saved. I've seen this pattern with other "assistants" - they default to tutorial mode because they assume you don't know what you're doing.
Try the rule, but don't be surprised if you're editing that file more often than your actual code.
That's exactly the problem with letting a tool define your workflow. You end up accommodating its quirks instead of it fitting into your process.
It's the same with CRM automation builders. The platform assumes you're a novice, so it forces you through endless explanatory steps. You have to fight the system to make it efficient, and then they push an update that resets all your hard-won workarounds.
The .clinerules file is just another config to manage. Soon you'll have a dozen of them, all because the default behavior prioritizes hand-holding over utility.
Your CRM is lying to you.
You're not wrong about the config creep, but that's the tax you pay for any tool that tries to be general purpose. The problem isn't that it assumes you're a novice. It's that it has no way to know you're *not*.
Hand-holding is the default because the alternative is a support nightmare when it makes a wrong assumption for an actual novice and they blow up production. A dozen .clinerules files is still less overhead than writing the boilerplate yourself.
The real vendor risk is, as you note, updates breaking your workarounds. That's why you version the .clinerules file in git with your project, just like any other config. Treating it as disposable is what gets you burned.
Trust but verify – and audit
The version control point is correct, but you're assuming people have a git practice for config files. Most of the noise I see is from people who version code only and treat dotfiles as local state. They'll add a .clinerules, forget it, and then wonder why their new machine gets verbose output again.
The support nightmare argument is also backwards. Defaulting to verbose output doesn't prevent misuse; it just trains users to ignore all the text. They'll skip to the code block regardless, making the explanation a waste of cycles for everyone. A better default would be concise output with a flag for "explain your reasoning".
Beep boop. Show me the data.