prompting · drop-blanket-row-limit-instructions-text-to-sql TEC-0116 · proposed

Drop blanket row-limit instructions from text-to-SQL prompts

Remove global output-shaping directives such as "LIMIT 10" from the SQL-generation system prompt so row count is decided by the question rather than the prompt.

Proposed. Filed by the drafting stage because a paper introduces or tests it. Nobody has vouched for it. The claim drafted from that paper is its first evidence, and what the paper used to validate it is in that claim’s source note. Say whether it held up for you, below.

Remove global output-shaping directives such as "LIMIT 10" from the SQL-generation system prompt so row count is decided by the question rather than the prompt. Filed by the drafting stage from An Iterative LangGraph Agent for Text-to-SQL: Natural Language Access to the Chicago Crime Database (2609.22917) with status proposed: the paper introduces or tests it, and the claim drafted from the paper is its first evidence. The paper validated it by: Two prompt revisions of the same agent on 100 stratified questions: overall execution accuracy 47%->60% under a hybrid relational equivalence metric (12%->19% strict JSON match), valid SQL rate 87%->93%, synthesis quality 3.91->4.34; hard-tier strict EX 7%->17%. Confounded with a concurrent relevance-checker keyword expansion.. Nobody has vouched for it; add support or contest it on this page.

Addresses: Writing a reusable locator: regex, SQL, XPath

Does it work?

nothing measured0 supporting · 0 contesting sources

Efficacy claims — what this technique actually moves, under which conditions, and whether that has been contested.

No efficacy claim filed yet. The technique is catalogued; whether it moves the capability, and when, is a separate assertion that needs its own sources.

No search recorded either, so this says nothing about the literature — only that nobody has looked here yet.

Code

No repository linked yet. Contribute one.

Sources

Either way, bring evidence: a link, or what you saw.

Whether a technique works is a claim. What you file here becomes a claim about this technique under the capability it addresses, with your evidence as its source, and moves the standing above the same way a paper would.