100 Content generation hacks to fight through generic responses

We all know how generic AI responses feel, but what do actually look and sound like? And how can we go outside-the box to break through?

After a long enough timeline working with tools like ChatGPT and its colleagues, the wall is inevitably hit. Once at this wall, the question arises: Why does this sound so damn generic?

If you’re in that frustrating middle zone—where the outputs are “technically” meh but never worth shipping, this post is for you. First off, you’re not alone. That valley between what we thought our prompt would get us and what it’s actually getting is something we all come across

So I’ve compiled a list of some of one hundred content generation hacks (or maybe jump-starters?) in this post. Have I used all of these? No, but they’re all super interesting and all worth a try. In this post we’re going to cover:

• The different types of generic responses and what they look like

• Why pushing through the pain is just a temporary stage of the journey (unless we give up every time)

• A laundry list of ways to move past each style of generic response to something worth keeping

---

Key Takeaways

• A generic response is public enemy number one when prompting AI, and there are some telltale symptoms (in terms of style, word choice and perspective)

• Knowing why something is generic is the key to moving on to something better

• Once we identify the flavor of generic, we can try a host of prompting hacks to break through

---

The different flavors of ‘generic’

Generic responses sit at the cross-section of sounding polished and totally forgettable. To this sort of response, your first thought might be, “This technically almost kind of works, but no one would ever actually say it like this.”

But how can we specifically call out what makes a response generic? And more importantly (for fixing this in the long run), why it’s generic.

Rather than just describe the symptoms of generic, let’s put these into context of actual people. And by actual people, I mean characters.

Reason 1: Buzzword bingo

The Bobs from Office Space. Hard stop.

"We need to streamline the whole process."

There’s no better way to save a rudderless company than to spit out a slew of business jargon and call it strategy:

"We're bringing in some efficiency experts to see where we can trim the fat."

Business bingo is that constellation of vague, overused cliches that you’d smirk at if you hear them at work. Scratch that, when you hear them at work (consultants have a rap for a reason).

It’s so common you’ve probably heard it 100 times by now, but some common substance lacking phrases:

• "In today's rapidly changing…”

• “It's important to note…”

• “In short:”

Not to mention buzzword clusters like "utilize" instead of "use", "synergy" instead of "cooperation", or "transformative," "scalable," "future-proof".

Reason 2: Superficial and universal

There’s a scene in Succession where the heir to a media tycoon (Conor Roy, played by Alan Ruck) gives a eulogy for a disgraced former company executive. Which he does, threading the needle of not implicating the family nor saying anything good about the deceased.

This is the result:

Hello. I'm here as a fellow human to acknowledge that Lester has, as we know, passed on.

Lester was a man. Also, Lester was an employee of the Waystar company for 40 years. And when a man dies, it is sad. All of us will die one day. In this case, it is Lester who has done so.

Lester was alive for 78 years. But no more. Now he is dead.

Lester's wife is Maria. They were married for 15 years. Now she is sad.

It’s so careful to avoid any controversial stance that it becomes unnatural. This eulogy fails (as a eulogy, it’s great comedy) for the same reason any non-AI writing would: insights require taking a position. As any overly-cautious, line-toeing boss can show you, hedging signals an absence of actual thought.

Under this umbrella also falls content so broad it could apply to almost anything. If a response could be describing a toothbrush, a podcast, or a blockchain-powered doorbell—that's a problem.

There’s nothing that says universality like using “everyone” instead of any kind of segmentation (remote workers, middle-aged teachers, Italian plumbers, etc.). But it doesn’t just fall on the ‘who’. Superficial or universal content will also:

• Convey broad benefits (“good habits” instead of “healthy exercise routines”)

• Describe broad problems (“personal struggles” instead of “facing isolation”)

• Lack any sense of time—timelessness is not a good look for AI responses

Reason 3: Overly formal or formulaic

If you’ve ever seen Brooklyn Nine-Nine, Captain Raymond Holt probably remains an unforgettable character for you (rest in peace, Andre Braughner). But the captain has a thing for sentences that go so far beyond the colloquial, you’d sound like a robot if you ever shared them in writing.

Like when he talked about the advantages of lying to catch a bad guy:

"I concur. The strategic deployment of misinformation can often yield advantageous results in the pursuit of justice. However, the ethical ramifications of such tactics must always be meticulously considered."

Or when he said he needed a moment to come up with a thoughtful response:

"I find myself in a state of considerable consternation regarding the current predicament. The confluence of unforeseen variables has created a scenario of significant complexity, demanding a judicious and carefully considered response."

Predictable formatting is also a giveaway of content devoid of originality. This can come in a few flavors:

• The same phrase or idea multiple times (slight rewording with zero advancement)

• The "Intro–3 Bullets–Call to Action"—the most predictable of structures

• Unnatural formality shifts and awkward transitions ("The process of photosynthesis converts light energy into chemical energy. Pretty cool, right?”).

Reason 4: Pinterest-board motivation

Don’t get me wrong, as a 90’s kid, I picked up a lesson or two from Danny Tanner. The house was never full unless the episode ended with a cherish-able lesson for a five-year-old, a middle schooler, or a deceivingly nerdy uncle.

And while the inimitable Bob Saget always delivered, he ultimately never said that much. About friendship, for example:

"Friends are like another part of your family. True friends are there for you through thick and thin, they support you, and they make you laugh. Cherish your friendships and be a good friend in return. Those bonds are so important as you go through life."

Or being trusted:

“If people can't trust you, it's hard to have real friends or for people to believe in you. Even when it's hard to tell the truth, even when you think you've made a mistake, it's always the right thing to do. Because then, people know who you really are, and they can trust you."

Helpful fundamentals of life for kids, sure. But most of us aren’t trying to use AI to help craft lessons for children.

---

Why not to give up on generic outputs

I’ve been the one who closes the tab after saying: “But it’s wasting my time. I could just write it myself.”

The temptation is always there: hit restart, retype the prompt, or worse, take over entirely. And sometimes, we should. But if every session ends with us sighing and taking over, then we’re not building any muscle around how to diagnose, reframe, or guide. That’s just rehearsing frustration.

Way back when I was first learning to code (at Dev Bootcamp), we’d go through low-impact exercises where it was always an option to undo everything and start from scratch. That’s in contrast to fixing what exists (like you’d have to do in the real-world of a corporate software). Which is to say, fixing is a good instinct because even though it’s more painful at first, it sets you up with the right habits.

This is exactly where the shift happens. Right here, in the moment when you’re tempted to scrap it all. The moment we need to learn the invaluable difference between “This isn’t working” and “I don’t yet know how to work with this.”

That second one? It’s a turning point. And if you get there, you’re already past the plateau many people never get through.

---

100 tactics to overcome generic AI responses

Tactics for combating Buzzword Bingo

These techniques explicitly remove jargon, clichés, and predictable industry terminology. By banning obvious words, challenging LinkedIn-style language, or recasting concepts with cynicism, the goal is to add constraints that make it impossible for AI to fall back on comfortable and overused phrases.

1. Forbidden Word Game: Ban the AI from using the 10 most obvious words related to your topic

2. Anti-LinkedIn Filter: "Explain this concept without using any phrases that would sound at home in a LinkedIn post"

3. The Devil's Dictionary: "Define the key terms in my question as if you were writing a cynical dictionary for industry insiders"

4. The Reverse Cliché Challenge: "Take the most overused advice on this topic and create its exact intelligent opposite"

5. Rewrite: "Where are you hedging? Replace hedges with bold statements"

6. Say what it's not: "Describe this concept, but remove all references to productivity"

7. Make it respond without using any of the words from the first draft

8. The Hot Take Generator: "Give me three controversial opinions about this topic that would make industry veterans uncomfortable"

9. The Taboo Revealer: "What aspects of this topic do professionals in the field know but rarely discuss publicly?"

10. Request reordering: "Now flip this and start with the punchline"

11. Begin with a myth and dismantle it

12. Ask it to start with an unpopular opinion

Tactics to address superficial or universal responses

We can force depth through contrarian perspectives, assumption challenging, and context exploration. Tactics that introduce skepticism, contradiction, and alternative viewpoints require AI to consider overlooked angles, implicit assumptions, or counterfactual scenarios. Doing so can help tip the scales to deliver nuance rather than bland platitudes.

1. The Contrarian Prompt: "What would someone who vehemently disagrees with conventional wisdom on this topic say?"

2. The Metaprompt Evolution: "Create a better prompt than the one I just gave you"

3. The Villain Perspective: "How would the antagonist in this scenario describe the situation?"

4. The Pessimist-Optimist Split: Request two completely different takes

5. Unpopular Opinion Mining: "What's an effective approach that most people in this field actively avoid discussing?"

6. The Assumption Hunter: "Identify the three most common assumptions people make when discussing this topic, then violate all of them"

7. The Context Explosion: "What crucial context is typically missing from discussions of this topic that completely changes how we should approach it?"

8. Ask for the next 3 layers deeper: "Now dig one level deeper. Now another"

9. Ask for the worst version of the idea first

10. Add internal contradiction: "Build a version of this that disagrees with itself"

11. Request a POV shift: "Retell this from the perspective of someone skeptical"

12. Request a counter-narrative: "What would someone disagreeing with this say?"

13. Add imagined reader pushback: "Include what someone skeptical might ask"

14. The Prediction Inversion: "What current 'best practices' in this field will seem ridiculous in 20 years?"

15. The Creative Saboteur: "What advice would someone give if they wanted to subtly undermine conventional wisdom while appearing to support it?"

16. The Intellectual Time Machine: "How would someone have approached this problem before the most commonly used solution was invented?"

17. The Mad Scientist Protocol: "What experiment could you design to test whether the conventional wisdom on this topic is actually wrong?"

18. Ask: "What's not being said here?"

19. The Response Dissection: Ask the AI to identify which parts of its answer were most generic and rewrite them

20. The Wrong-Tool Approach: "How would someone solve this using entirely inappropriate methods that might accidentally work?"

21. Add failure stories instead of how-tos

22. Ask: "What metaphor could you use here that no one else would think of?"

Tactics for breaking the formal or formulaic

These techniques rely on unexpected formats, voices, genres, or historical contexts to force the AI to abandon its defaults. The tactics in this category—whether explaining business concepts in noir fiction, adopting historical personas, or framing responses as reality show pitches—create novel presentation methods.

1. The Anachronism Challenge: Ask the AI to respond as if your topic was being discussed in 1805

2. Genre Collision: Request business advice in the style of a noir detective novel

3. Format Rebellion: Ask for your response structured as a dialogue between two disagreeing experts

4. The Unexpected Expert: "How would a deep-sea diver approach my content marketing strategy?"

5. Concept Transplant: Request explanations using terminology from an entirely unrelated field

6. Historical Persona Adoption: "Respond as if you're Nikola Tesla commenting on modern remote work challenges"

7. The Alien Anthropologist: "Describe this human activity as if you're an alien researcher trying to make sense of it for the first time"

8. Turn the prompt into a debate: "Give me the argument, then the rebuttal"

9. Add a twist: "Explain this idea, but in the voice of someone who hates it"

10. Change the audience: "Write this for a frustrated high schooler"

11. Add a tone with bite: "Rewrite this like it's coming from a sarcastic genius"

12. Steal a known format: "Write it like an opening monologue from The Daily Show"

13. Make it imitate a very specific persona: "Act like a burned-out teacher who just rediscovered hope"

14. Reference a real brand you like and say "Give me that vibe"

15. Break the summary: "Now write this as a journal entry, not a summary"

16. Use analogy triggers: "Compare this to cooking over a campfire"

17. The Generational Shift: "How would Gen Z explain this concept versus how Baby Boomers would explain it?"

18. The Reality Show Pitch: "Frame your answer as a pitch for a reality show that would demonstrate these principles in action"

19. Cultural Translation: Request the same information framed through different cultural lenses

20. The ELI5-to-PhD Ladder: Request multiple explanations that progressively increase in complexity

21. Temporal Reframing: "How would someone explain this differently 20 years ago, today, and 20 years from now?"

22. The Time Traveler: "Explain this to someone from 50 years in the future who finds our current approaches quaint"

23. Turn it into a conversation: "Now rewrite this as a Q&A with my inner critic"

24. Limit the format: "Summarize this as three tweet-sized statements"

25. Break the fourth wall: "Let the narrator comment on how boring this was the first time"

Tactics to spice up Pinterest-Board motivation

By moving beyond vaguities to precisely defined scenarios, bizarre metaphors, or deliberate misinterpretations, we can combat shallow motivation. Alter prompts in ways that disrupt AI’s tendency for generic positivity through unusual elements or hyper-specific contexts. In other words, we try to make it impossible to produce the equivalent of a coffee mug slogan.

1. Emotional Specificity: Request a response that evokes a specific emotion

2. Extreme Specificity: "Give me advice for this situation assuming I'm working specifically on a Tuesday afternoon during a minor power outage"

3. The Constraint Spiral: Add increasingly bizarre constraints

4. The Deliberate Misinterpretation: "Intentionally misinterpret my query in the most productive way possible"

5. The Exaggeration Game: "Take the standard advice on this topic and exaggerate it to its most absurd extreme"

6. Deliberate Misunderstanding: "Pretend you initially misunderstood my question in a specific way, then correct yourself"

7. The Metaphor Marathon: Request successive explanations using increasingly bizarre metaphors

8. Reverse Expertise: Ask for a response from someone who knows absolutely nothing about the field but is trying to fake expertise

9. The Start-in-the-Middle Technique: "Skip the introduction and obvious points"

10. The Pattern Interrupter: "Start writing a typical response, then halfway through, challenge everything you've said"

11. Interrupt the flow: "Add a mid-paragraph confession that breaks the tone"

12. Ask for a metaphor that gradually collapses by the end

13. Add a surreal twist: "Now rewrite this as a dream sequence"

14. Assign it a weird word to include in every paragraph

15. Ask it to include one line of dialogue in every answer

16. Add a nonsense rule: "Every sentence must contain exactly 9 words"

17. Ask it to include a secret code for you to find

18. Make it rhymed, but serious: "Explain this idea in lyrical verse"

19. Insert a fake sponsor: "Include a subtle plug for an imaginary product"

20. Add emotional stakes: "Write this as if it were the last blog post you ever publish"

21. Ask it to rewrite its response like it's embarrassed by it

22. The Artificial Deadline: "You have only 30 seconds to give me the most unique insight about this topic"

23. The Inception Prompt: "Write a conversation between me and you where I'm pushing you to give less generic answers"

24. Mystery Box Challenge: "Provide your response but deliberately hide one crucial piece of information"

25. The Recursive Question: Ask the AI to critique its own likely generic response before it gives it

26. Reverse Engineering: "What questions should I have asked to get a more useful answer?"

27. The Quality Spectrum: "On a scale from 'completely generic' to 'surprisingly insightful,' how would you rate your response?"

28. The Intellectual Heist: "Explain this topic as if you're planning to steal its core concepts to apply to something completely different"

29. The Constraint Liberation: "What if the main constraint everyone accepts in this field suddenly disappeared?"

30. Include specific personal context: "Here's what I care about. Reflect that"

31. Use a single paragraph of your own writing as a tone reference

32. Add a random linguistic constraint: "Explain this without using any words longer than 6 letters"

33. Rephrase the goal as a constraint: "Explain this without using any words longer than 6 letters"

34. Have it challenge your assumptions mid-way: "Interrupt the answer with: 'Are you sure about that?'"

35. Seed the prompt with your actual values (e.g., "I hate fluff. I love clarity")

36. Use a dice roll or random number generator to pick a constraint

37. Limit it to a format: "Only bulleted lists allowed"

38. Add temporal contrast: "How would this answer change in 1995 vs. 2025?"

39. Force timeline movement: "Write this like it's a past-tense case study"

40. Challenge the output's structure: "What's a more counterintuitive way to organize this idea?"

41. Invert the order of everything and force the conclusion first

---

Try just one hack today—maybe the weirdest one. And if you get to that moment where the output surprises you? You’re on the right track.