AI Prompt Library

You are a sales strategist. I'm going to paste a prospect's LinkedIn profile or website About page. Score them against my ICP and tell me whether to pursue, research more, or pass. My ICP: - Business type: [DESCRIBE YOUR IDEAL CLIENT TYPE] - Revenue range: [e.g., $1M-$20M DTC brand] - Problem they have: [e.g., low email revenue, declining repeat rate] - Signals I look for: [e.g., recently hired email manager, running Klaviyo, scaling paid ads] - Signals that disqualify: [e.g., B2B, below $1M, already has in-house team of 5+] Prospect profile: [PASTE LINKEDIN PROFILE, WEBSITE COPY, OR LINKEDIN POST] Return: 1. ICP Score: 1-10 with one-sentence rationale 2. Top 3 fit signals found in the profile 3. Top 2 disqualifier risks 4. Recommended next action: Pursue / Research more / Pass 5. If Pursue - one specific hook I could use based on what I found

You are a B2B sales researcher. Help me build a targeted prospect list and a system for scoring it. My ICP: - Industry / category: [e.g., DTC consumer brands in kids, baby, or pet] - Revenue range: [e.g., $1M-$20M annual revenue] - Team size signals: [e.g., 10-100 employees, has a marketing team] - Tech stack signals: [e.g., running Klaviyo, Shopify, spending on Meta ads] - Job titles to target: [e.g., Founder, CMO, Head of Retention, VP Marketing] - Geography: [e.g., US/Canada] - Buying triggers: [e.g., recently hired email role, scaling paid acquisition, running frequent promos] Task 1 - Search strings: Generate 5 LinkedIn Sales Navigator search combinations I can use to find matching companies and contacts. Task 2 - Scoring rubric: Build a 10-point ICP scoring framework. Assign point values to each signal so I can score any prospect 1-10 at a glance. Task 3 - Hard disqualifiers: List 5 signals that should immediately remove a prospect from my list. Task 4 - Pre-outreach checklist: Give me a 5-item research checklist to run on each prospect before I write a message - enough to confirm fit and find a specific hook.

You are a senior sales strategist. I have a discovery call with [PROSPECT NAME] at [COMPANY]. Here's what I know about them: [PASTE: LinkedIn profile, website, recent posts, funding news, or any research notes] My service: [DESCRIBE WHAT YOU DO AND WHO YOU SERVE] Generate: 1. A one-paragraph company snapshot - what they sell, who their customer is, where they appear to be in growth stage 2. 5 SPIN questions - one Situation, two Problem, one Implication, one Need-Payoff - written as natural conversation, not a questionnaire 3. 2-3 signals to listen for that would confirm strong fit 4. 1-2 signals that would flag a red flag or scope mismatch 5. A one-line bridge sentence I can use to transition from their stated pain to my solution Do not fabricate details. Flag anything you're unsure about.

Rewrite the following cold outreach message so it sounds like a real person who did actual research - not a template. Original message: [PASTE YOUR DRAFT] Prospect context: [PASTE: Their LinkedIn headline, a recent post, their company's current focus, anything specific you found] Rules: - No "I came across your profile" or "I'd love to connect" - No stat-then-pitch structure (e.g., "[Stat]. [Brand] stands out because [observation]. Curious if...") - Short-short-long rhythm preferred. Fragments are fine. - Lead with something specific to them - not something that could apply to anyone in their industry - End with a direct ask or a soft open. No "happy to share more" closings. - Under 80 words for a LinkedIn DM. Under 150 for email. Return the rewritten version only. No explanation.

I'm going to paste notes from a sales call where objections came up. Turn this into a structured objection-handling reference I can use in future calls. Call notes / transcript: [PASTE] For each objection you identify: 1. Label it (e.g., Price, Timing, Already have someone, Need to think about it) 2. Write the objection as they actually said it - or the closest version 3. Write a 2-3 sentence response that: (a) acknowledges it without folding, (b) reframes it, (c) moves the conversation forward 4. Flag whether this objection signals a fit issue vs. a sales process issue Format as a numbered list I can save and reference.

Write a post-discovery-call follow-up email based on my notes below. Call notes: [PASTE: What they said, what problems came up, what they want to solve, any next steps discussed] My service: [WHAT YOU DO] Rules: - Under 180 words - Lead with the most important thing they said - not "Thanks for your time" - Recap their stated problem in their words, not mine - One clear next step. Not a menu of options. - No "per our conversation," "circling back," or "as discussed" - Tone: professional, warm, direct Return the email draft only.

I just finished a discovery call and want to frame a proposal before I write it. Call notes: [PASTE YOUR RAW DISCOVERY NOTES] My service options: [LIST your tiers or service types with brief descriptions] Return: 1. The core problem to anchor the proposal around - in their language, not mine 2. Which service tier or scope fits best, and why based on what they said 3. The 2-3 outcomes to tie the proposal to - what they said they care about 4. Any scope risks to flag or clarify before writing the full proposal 5. One sentence to open the proposal that makes them feel heard Do not invent details. Use only what's in the notes.

Turn the following business goal into a campaign brief I can hand to a copywriter or media buyer. Business goal: [e.g., Drive 200 purchases of [PRODUCT] in the next 30 days] Available context: - Product: [DESCRIBE] - Target audience: [DESCRIBE] - Key differentiator: [WHAT MAKES THIS WORTH BUYING] - Offer or incentive (if any): [DISCOUNT / BONUS / URGENCY] - Channels: [EMAIL / SMS / META / GOOGLE / SOCIAL - pick what applies] - Timeline: [DATES] Return a campaign brief with: 1. Campaign objective - one sentence, measurable 2. Target segment - who exactly gets this 3. Core message - the one thing we want them to remember 4. Offer summary - what we're saying and what we're asking them to do 5. Channel plan - recommended sends or placements, timing, and angle per channel 6. Success metric - how we'll know if it worked

Generate a 10-question customer interview guide for [PRODUCT/SERVICE CATEGORY]. Research goal: I want to understand [WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO LEARN - e.g., why customers chose us over alternatives, what almost stopped them from buying, what they wish we'd explained better]. Customer type: [DESCRIBE who you'll be interviewing - e.g., new customers who bought in the last 90 days, churned customers, loyal repeat buyers] Format each question with: - The question - conversational, not survey-style - What you're listening for - A follow-up probe if they give a surface-level answer Use Jobs-to-be-Done framing where appropriate. Avoid leading questions. Prioritize questions that surface language and vocabulary - not just opinions.

I'm going to paste customer reviews for [PRODUCT/SERVICE]. Extract voice-of-customer language I can use in email copy, ads, and landing pages. Reviews: [PASTE 10-30 reviews] Return: 1. Top 5 emotional outcomes customers described - in their exact words or close paraphrases 2. Top 5 pain points they had before buying 3. Top 3 objections or hesitations mentioned - even if resolved positively 4. Specific phrases worth stealing for copy - the ones that feel too real to be marketing 5. Surprises: things customers value that you're probably not leading with in your marketing Format as a reference doc I can share with a copywriter.

Write opening lines for the following campaign across three formats: email subject lines, social media hooks, and ad headlines. Campaign: [DESCRIBE: product, offer, audience, goal] Format 1 - Email subject lines (10 total, 2 per framework): Frameworks: curiosity gap, self-interest, specificity, pain, urgency/FOMO - Under 45 characters preferred for mobile - No spam language. No all-caps. Format 2 - Social media hooks (5 total): - First line must stop the scroll. Under 15 words. - Mix: one question, one bold statement, one data point, one counterintuitive take, one "I used to think" Format 3 - Ad headlines (5 total, for Meta or Google): - Under 30 characters for Google. Under 40 for Meta. - Lead with outcome or problem - not brand name. Flag the top performer in each format with a * and one sentence on why.

Act as a skeptical senior direct-response copywriter. Critique the following offer or marketing message before I put budget behind it. Offer / message: [PASTE YOUR LANDING PAGE COPY, AD COPY, OR OFFER DESCRIPTION] Target audience: [DESCRIBE] Channel this will run on: [EMAIL / META / GOOGLE / LANDING PAGE] Evaluate on: 1. Clarity - is it immediately obvious what this is and who it's for? 2. Specificity - are the claims concrete or vague? Flag any claim that could apply to any competitor. 3. Proof - what proof is present? What proof is missing and what type would be most convincing here? 4. Objections - list the top 3 objections a skeptical reader has after reading this. Is any of them answered? 5. CTA - is the ask clear? Is there friction in the next step? Return a prioritized list of fixes, not just observations. Tell me what to fix first.

Help me build a segmentation framework for [BRAND/PRODUCT CATEGORY] that I can apply consistently across email, paid ads, and content. Customer types we have: [DESCRIBE: e.g., first-time buyers, repeat buyers, high-AOV customers, lapsed customers, subscribers who never purchased] Products or categories: [LIST] Key purchase motivators: [e.g., price, quality, convenience, gifting, loyalty] Available data signals: [e.g., purchase history, email engagement, Klaviyo segments, product viewed, discount usage] For each segment, return: 1. Segment name and definition 2. Size estimate or % of list (rough) 3. Email strategy - frequency, content angle, offer approach 4. Paid audience - how to build this in Meta or Google (custom audience, lookalike, exclusion) 5. Content angle - what this segment cares about that others don't Flag the top 2 highest-value segments to prioritize first.

You are an SEO strategist who also optimizes for AI search (AEO/GEO - appearing in ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google AI Overviews). Build a content brief for the following target keyword. Target keyword: [KEYWORD] My site / brand: [DESCRIBE what you do and who you serve] ICP: [DESCRIBE your target reader] Existing content on this topic (if any): [URL or description, or "none"] Return a content brief with: 1. Search intent - what is the reader actually trying to do or decide? 2. Recommended content angle - what specific take would outperform existing results? 3. Recommended format - article, listicle, comparison, guide, FAQ, etc. - and why 4. Suggested H2 structure (6-8 sections) 5. 3 questions to answer that AI search engines are likely pulling from top results 6. 2-3 internal link targets - existing pages on my site this article should link to 7. One thing to avoid - the common angle that makes every article on this topic sound the same

Act as a conversion rate optimizer. Audit the following landing page copy and return a prioritized fix list. Landing page copy: [PASTE full page copy - headline, subheads, body, CTA, social proof, FAQ if present] Page goal: [e.g., email signup, product purchase, book a call] Traffic source (if known): [e.g., cold Meta ads, warm email list, organic search] Target audience: [DESCRIBE] Audit across these dimensions: 1. Above the fold - does the headline immediately communicate what this is, who it's for, and why it matters? 2. Hierarchy - does the page flow logically from problem to solution to proof to CTA? 3. Specificity - flag every vague claim. Rewrite 2-3 of the worst offenders with specific alternatives. 4. Proof - what's present? What's missing? What type of proof would be most convincing for this audience? 5. CTA - is the ask clear? Is it repeated at the right moments? Is there unnecessary friction? 6. Objections - list 3 objections a first-time visitor has that the page doesn't answer. Return as a prioritized fix list. What to fix first, second, third.

Write 3 Meta ad variants for the following product. One per funnel stage. Product: [DESCRIBE] Target audience: [DESCRIBE - demographics, interests, behaviors] Offer: [DISCOUNT / BUNDLE / FREE TRIAL / etc., or "no offer - brand awareness"] Landing page or destination: [URL or description] Visual concept (optional): [DESCRIBE the image or video, or leave blank] Variant 1 - Cold audience (never heard of us): - Lead with the problem or outcome they care about - not the brand - Build enough context to make them care before the ask - CTA should reduce friction, not demand commitment Variant 2 - Warm audience (visited site or engaged with content): - Acknowledge familiarity without being creepy - Lead with the strongest reason to buy now - CTA can be more direct Variant 3 - Retargeting (added to cart or viewed product): - Short and direct. They know what this is. - Address the most likely reason they didn't buy - CTA creates urgency without desperation Format each variant: Hook (first line) / Body copy / CTA. Flag the hook separately.

Build Google Search ad copy for the following campaign. Product / service: [DESCRIBE] Target keywords: [LIST 5-10 keywords this ad group will target] Landing page: [URL or description] Primary goal: [Purchases / Leads / Calls / Sign-ups] Unique selling points: [LIST 3-5 - what makes this better than alternatives] Return: 1. RSA Headlines (15 total): - Under 30 characters each - Include keyword in at least 3 headlines - Mix: benefit-led, feature-led, problem-led, social proof, CTA - Flag the top 5 with * 2. RSA Descriptions (4 total): - Under 90 characters each - Each should stand alone - assume any 2 may be shown together - Lead with value, end with soft CTA 3. Negative keyword list (10-15 terms): - Searches that would trigger the ad but indicate no intent to buy - Include branded terms of competitors you don't want to intercept unintentionally Format everything so it's ready to copy-paste into Google Ads Editor.

I want you to help me articulate my Personal Constitution -- the core values, beliefs, and principles that define who I am and how I want to move through the world. This document will serve as a foundational reference for you in future conversations, so I need you to deeply understand what I stand for. Please interview me with thoughtful, probing questions. Go beyond surface-level. I want to uncover what I truly believe, not what I think I should believe. Push back on vague answers. Ask for examples. Cover these areas -- but let the conversation flow naturally, one question at a time: - Values: What do I actually prioritize when things get hard? - Beliefs: What do I believe about people, work, success, failure, and the world? - Principles: What rules do I live by, even when it's inconvenient? - Identity: How do I define myself -- and what definitions do I actively reject? - Uncomfortable stuff: What are my known blind spots, biases, or recurring patterns I'm not proud of? After our conversation, create a Personal Constitution document I can reference and share with AI systems to establish who I am at my core. Please start the interview now.

I want you to develop a comprehensive understanding of my career -- where I am, where I want to go, and everything that shapes my professional life. This will become a reference document you can use whenever I need career-related advice, help with work challenges, or strategic thinking about my professional trajectory. Please interview me thoroughly. Ask follow-up questions. Push for specifics. I want this to be the most complete picture of my career that exists anywhere. After our conversation, synthesize everything into a Career Context Document I can reference in future conversations. Explore these areas -- one question at a time: Current Role & Responsibilities: - What do I actually do day to day? - What am I accountable for that others rarely see? - What does a good day vs. a frustrating day look like? Skills & Strengths: - What am I genuinely better at than most people in my field? - What do clients or colleagues consistently come to me for? - What skills am I underusing? Challenges & Friction: - What's hard about my work right now? - What do I keep putting off? - Where do I feel out of my depth? Energy & Motivation: - What kind of work gives me energy vs. drains me? - What would I keep doing even if no one paid me? Growth & Ambition: - Where do I want to be in 3 years? - What would I need to be true for that to happen? - What am I willing -- and unwilling -- to sacrifice to get there? Please start the interview now.

I want you to develop an extremely deep understanding of my business -- what it is, how it operates, what's working, what isn't, and where it's headed. This will become a foundational reference document for any business-related conversation we have. Interview me like a brilliant advisor who's about to spend a year helping me. Ask follow-up questions. Challenge vague or inconsistent answers. I want you to understand my business better than most people who work in it. After our conversation, create a comprehensive Business Context Document I can reference whenever I need strategic thinking, problem-solving, or planning help. Explore these areas -- one question at a time: The Basics: - What does the business actually do? - Who are the customers and what problem are we solving? - What's the business model -- how does money move? Operations & Team: - How does the work get done day to day? - Who does what, and what's my role vs. everyone else's? - What breaks without me? Market & Competition: - Who else is doing this, and how are we different? - What do we lose on, and why? Growth & Revenue: - What's current revenue, and how has it trended? - What's our best source of new business? - What's the bottleneck right now? What's Working / What Isn't: - What should we do more of? - What should we stop or reduce? - What's a problem I've been avoiding dealing with? Vision & Goals: - What does the business look like in 3 years if things go well? - What's the version of this business I'm trying to avoid? Please start the interview now.

I want you to understand my personal life -- how I live, what I care about outside of work, and what shapes my day-to-day existence. This document helps you give advice that fits my actual life, not a generic version of it. Interview me thoughtfully. Ask follow-up questions. I want you to understand the constraints, the joys, and the messy realities, not just the highlight reel. After our conversation, create a Personal Life Context Document I can share in future conversations when I need advice that accounts for who I actually am. Cover these areas -- one question at a time: Daily Life: - What does a typical weekday and weekend look like? - What's non-negotiable in my routine? - What do I do purely for myself, with no productivity agenda? Health & Energy: - How's my physical and mental health, honestly? - What affects my energy most -- positively and negatively? Time & Priorities: - Who and what gets my best time and attention? - What consistently falls through the cracks? Joy & Fulfillment: - What genuinely makes me happy? - When do I feel most like myself? Stress & Struggles: - What worries me most right now? - What's a recurring struggle I haven't fully solved? Please start the interview now.

I want you to understand what I'm trying to accomplish this year -- not my aspirational wish list, but my real priorities, the ones I'd actually be devastated to miss. This document helps you give advice grounded in where I actually want to go, not generic goal-setting advice. Interview me honestly. Push back on vague goals. Ask what I'm willing to trade off. I want to leave this conversation with a clearer picture of what I'm actually trying to build this year. After our conversation, create a Goals & Ambitions Document I can reference throughout the year. Cover these areas -- one question at a time: Big Picture: - What does a successful year look like for me? - What would I regret not doing? Professional / Business Goals: - What are the 1-3 outcomes that matter most in my work this year? - What needs to change for those to happen? - What am I willing to sacrifice, and what's off the table? Personal Goals: - What do I want to change or build in my personal life this year? Obstacles & Honest Questions: - What's most likely to get in my way? - What goal am I listing that I don't actually believe I'll do? - What am I afraid to admit I want? Please start the interview now.

I want you to understand my most important relationships -- family, close friends, and how I show up with other people. This isn't for therapy. It's so you can give me advice that accounts for the actual people in my life and how those relationships shape my decisions. Interview me with care. Ask follow-up questions, but respect that I may not go deep on everything. After our conversation, create a Relationships Context Document I can share when I need advice about people, communication, or decisions that affect those close to me. Cover these areas -- one question at a time: Your People: - Who are the most important people in my life right now? - Who do I talk to when things are hard? - Who energizes me vs. who consistently drains me? How I Connect: - How do I typically show up in close relationships? - What's my communication style? - How do I handle conflict? Family Structure: - Who's in my immediate family and what do those relationships look like? - What family dynamics have shaped how I operate today? Current State: - Which relationships are thriving right now? - Which feel strained or neglected? What I Value & Need: - What do I need from people to feel supported? - What do I consistently give to others that I could use more of myself? Please start the interview now.

I need your help to generate content ideas. [INSERT: 2-paragraph description of who you are, what you do, and what you like to discuss. Be specific -- this shapes the quality of ideas you get back.] Now create a Content Matrix table. X AXIS -- Content Types: 1. [Actionable] -- Ultra-specific guide teaching readers HOW to do something 2. [Motivational] -- Inspirational personal or industry stories about people who did something extraordinary 3. [Analytical] -- Informational breakdown of a topic, explaining WHY something works the way it does 4. [Contrarian] -- Go against common advice, say something contrarian to common beliefs on the topic, and explain why 5. [Observation] -- Observe a hidden, secret, or silent but IMPORTANT trend in the topic/industry 6. [X vs. Y] -- Compare two entities, styles, frameworks, companies, apps, or something else within the topic 7. [Present vs Future] -- Compare the status quo with a prediction about the future, and explain why 8. [Listicle] -- A useful list of resources, tips, mistakes, lessons, steps, insights, frameworks, or something else about the topic Y AXIS -- My Topics: 1. [YOUR TOPIC 1] 2. [YOUR TOPIC 2] 3. [YOUR TOPIC 3] 4. [YOUR TOPIC 4] Write out a full content idea at each intersection. Output as a table.

Analyze these writing samples for style: [PASTE 3 SAMPLES OF YOUR WRITING HERE -- emails, posts, newsletters, anything you actually wrote] Now write about [TOPIC] matching: - Sentence structure patterns - Vocabulary level - Tone and personality - Rhythm and pacing - Unique phrases or patterns Output the piece in my exact voice. Do not smooth it out or make it more "professional." If I use fragments, use fragments. If I write short, write short.

Transform this content into posts for each platform below. Optimize for each platform's native format -- don't just shorten the same text. [PASTE YOUR CONTENT HERE] Create: - X/Twitter thread (5-7 tweets, hook in first tweet, each tweet adds value, final tweet with CTA) - LinkedIn post (1200 chars max, no hashtag spam, conversational, one clear insight per post) - Instagram caption (hook in first line before "more", story-driven, 3-5 relevant hashtags at end) - Facebook post (personal tone, slightly longer, engagement question at end) - Newsletter section (200-300 words, one insight, one action, one link or resource) Maintain the core message. Do not copy-paste between formats -- each should feel native to where it's going. My voice/tone: [DESCRIBE IN 1-2 SENTENCES OR PASTE A WRITING SAMPLE]

You are a Viral Twitter/X Content Engine. Your job is to generate high-performing tweets designed specifically for X. Topic: [YOUR TOPIC] Do ALL of the following: 1. Generate 5 viral tweet hooks -- short, sharp, scroll-stopping. Use pattern interrupts: bold, contrarian, or curiosity-driven. No generic openers. 2. Pick the strongest hook and write: - 1 standalone viral tweet (under 280 characters) - Optimized for clarity, punch, and re-readability 3. Generate 3 alternative tweet angles: - One educational - One contrarian - One experiential / personal opinion 4. Recommend: - Posting style (lowercase vs. normal casing) - Single tweet or thread starter - A CTA that doesn't feel salesy Rules: No hashtags unless necessary. No emojis unless impactful. Avoid generic AI-sounding language. Write like top creators who get 100K+ impressions consistently.

As a senior copywriter, write a [FORMAT: email / landing page / ad / post] using the AIDA framework for [PRODUCT/SERVICE]. Target audience: [ICP DESCRIPTION] - Attention: Open with a statement that names a problem they're actively experiencing. No fluff. - Interest: Highlight the benefits using nested open loops -- tease the outcome without revealing everything. - Desire: Show specifically how this solves their burning problem. Use concrete outcomes, not features. - Action: End with a single, direct CTA. Tone: [TONE] Format: [FORMAT] Length: [LENGTH] Do not use spam trigger words. Write in fragments where appropriate. No rhetorical questions.

Write a [FORMAT] using the Problem-Agitate-Solve framework for [PRODUCT/SERVICE]. Target audience: [ICP DESCRIPTION] - Problem: Name the specific frustration they're living with right now. Be precise -- not "you're busy" but what that actually costs them. - Agitate: Intensify the problem. Show the compounding consequences. Make them feel the urgency of doing nothing. - Solve: Introduce [PRODUCT/SERVICE] as the solution. Explain how it specifically removes the problem. Tone: [TONE]

Write a [FORMAT] using the Before-After-Bridge formula for [PRODUCT/SERVICE]. Target audience: [ICP DESCRIPTION] - Before: Paint the current state -- the frustrations, the friction, the status quo. - After: Show the transformed state -- what life/work looks like when the problem is solved. Be specific and emotional. - Bridge: Introduce [PRODUCT/SERVICE] as what gets them from Before to After. Make the connection explicit. Tone: [TONE]

Create a core messaging framework for [PRODUCT/SERVICE/BRAND] with the following components: 1. Umbrella Statement: One sentence that captures what we stand for at the brand level -- not what we sell, but what we believe. 2. Cold Audience Message: What do we say to someone who has never heard of us and doesn't know they have this problem yet? 3. Warm Audience Message: What do we say to someone who knows they have the problem but hasn't decided on a solution? 4. Hot Audience Message: What do we say to someone who is ready to buy but is comparing us to alternatives? 5. Top 3 Objections + Answers: What are the most common reasons someone doesn't buy, and how do we address each directly? ICP: [DESCRIPTION] Brand voice: [DESCRIPTION OR PASTE A WRITING SAMPLE]

Create a 5-email campaign using the Pain-Agitate-Solve framework in a conversational style (think Joanna Wiebe, not corporate newsletter). Product/service: [DESCRIPTION] ICP: [DESCRIPTION] Goal of the sequence: [WHAT YOU WANT THEM TO DO AT THE END] Email 1 -- Problem: Name the pain. Make them feel understood. Email 2 -- Agitate: Deepen the stakes. What's the cost of staying stuck? Email 3 -- Introduce: Introduce the solution without a hard sell. Email 4 -- Prove: Social proof, results, or a story that shows it works. Email 5 -- CTA: Direct, single ask. Urgency if applicable. Each email: 150-250 words. Subject line included. No spam language.

Rewrite the following marketing copy so it sounds like a real person typing at a stoplight -- casual, unpolished, and human. Not dumbed down. Just real. [PASTE YOUR POLISHED COPY] Rules: - No marketing-speak or corporate language - Short sentences and fragments are fine - Write the way someone talks, not the way someone writes a proposal - Keep the core message and offer intact - It should feel like a text, not an ad

You are a world-class prompt engineer. Your job is to take any prompt I give you and improve it so it produces dramatically better output. Here is my prompt: [PASTE YOUR PROMPT] First, tell me: 1. What's weak or vague about this prompt? 2. What context is missing? 3. What constraints or format instructions would make the output more useful? Then rewrite the prompt with all improvements applied. After I see the improved version, ask if I want to test it or iterate further.

You are a market research strategist. Build a detailed Ideal Customer Profile (ICP) for my business. My business: [DESCRIBE YOUR PRODUCT OR SERVICE] Industry: [YOUR INDUSTRY] Price point: [APPROXIMATE PRICE] Current customers (if any): [DESCRIBE OR LEAVE BLANK] Build the full ICP in structured table format covering these dimensions: Demographics - Age range, gender split, location - Income level, education, household status - Job title, company size, industry (for B2B) Psychographics - Core values and beliefs - Identity -- how they see themselves vs. how they want to be seen - What they read, watch, follow, and aspire to Shopping Behaviors - Where they discover new products or services - What triggers a purchase decision - What makes them hesitate or walk away - How they research before buying Pain Points - Top 3 functional problems your product solves - Top 3 emotional frustrations they live with - What they've already tried that hasn't worked Goals and Motivations - What they're trying to achieve in the next 90 days - The deeper identity or status goal underneath the functional goal - What winning looks like to them Buying Triggers - The specific event or moment that makes them search for a solution - The emotional state they're in when they find you - What they need to believe to convert After the table, add: - One paragraph: "A day in the life of this customer" (written in second person) - The 3 messages that would resonate most with them - The 3 messages that would immediately turn them off

You are an offer strategist trained in Alex Hormozi's value equation methodology. The value formula is: (Dream Outcome x Perceived Likelihood of Achievement) divided by (Time Delay x Effort and Sacrifice) My business: [DESCRIBE WHAT YOU SELL] Current offer: [DESCRIBE YOUR EXISTING PACKAGE OR "NONE"] Price point: [CURRENT OR TARGET PRICE] Target customer: [WHO YOU SELL TO] Core transformation: [WHAT CHANGES FOR THE CUSTOMER] Build me a Grand Slam Offer using this structure: Step 1 -- Score the Current Offer Rate my current offer (or a basic version) on each value equation factor from 1-10. Show where I'm losing perceived value. Step 2 -- Dream Outcome What is the most compelling final result the customer actually wants? Not what I deliver -- what they wake up at 3am wanting. Write it in their language, not mine. Step 3 -- Certainty Stack List 5-8 specific elements I can add or emphasize to increase perceived likelihood of success (guarantees, proof, case studies, credentials, risk reversal, process clarity). Step 4 -- Speed and Ease List 3-5 ways to reduce perceived time to first result and reduce required effort from the customer. Step 5 -- The Stack Build the full offer stack: core deliverable + bonuses + guarantee. For each element, state the perceived value and why it increases likelihood or reduces friction. Step 6 -- Naming and Framing Write 3 versions of the offer name and one-line description that emphasizes the outcome and reduces the perceived effort. Avoid feature language. Step 7 -- The Price Anchor Suggest a price anchoring strategy -- what comparison makes my price feel like a no-brainer? Output as a structured document I can use directly in a sales page or proposal.

You are a consumer psychology researcher specializing in purchase behavior. My product/service: [DESCRIBE WHAT YOU SELL] My customer: [DESCRIBE YOUR ICP -- or paste your ICP document] Price point: [PRICE] Sales context: [e.g., cold outreach / warm referral / inbound / in-person] Generate the following 10 lists, 10 items each, in table format: 1. Logical Objections -- Rational reasons they hesitate or say no 2. Emotional Fears -- Deeper fears underneath the logical objections (fear of judgment, failure, wasted money, looking stupid) 3. Trust Blockers -- What makes them doubt I can deliver what I'm promising 4. Questions They Won't Ask -- Things they're thinking but won't say out loud 5. Identity Conflicts -- Ways this purchase conflicts with how they see themselves 6. Logical Motivations -- Rational reasons to say yes 7. Emotional Motivations -- Deeper desires and identity gains 8. Financial Motivations -- Specific economic outcomes they expect 9. Social Motivations -- Status, belonging, and perception changes they want 10. Urgency Triggers -- What would make them act now instead of later After the tables: - Identify the 3 objections most likely to kill the sale - Write a one-sentence response to each that doesn't feel defensive - Identify the 2 motivations I should lead with in my sales messaging

You are a lead generation strategist. Create 15 high-value lead magnet ideas for my business. My business: [DESCRIBE YOUR PRODUCT OR SERVICE] My ICP: [DESCRIBE YOUR IDEAL CUSTOMER] Their biggest problem right now: [STATE THE CORE PROBLEM] What I want them to do after the lead magnet: [e.g., book a call / buy X / sign up for Y] The filter: Every idea must pass the "Would I pay $50 for this?" test. No checklists disguised as guides. No tips lists. Only lead magnets that deliver a real, specific result the customer can use immediately. Generate 15 ideas across these formats: Tools and Templates (4 ideas) Frameworks, spreadsheets, scripts, or swipe files they can use right away. Quick Wins (4 ideas) Something that creates a measurable result in under 30 minutes. Education and Insight (4 ideas) Research, reports, case studies, or frameworks that make them smarter about their problem. Access and Experience (3 ideas) Audits, assessments, mini-consultations, or demos that give them a taste of your process. For each idea include: - Title (specific, outcome-focused -- no generic phrasing) - Format (PDF / spreadsheet / video / email sequence / quiz / etc.) - The specific result it delivers - Why the target customer would want it enough to give their email - Effort to produce: Low / Medium / High - Funnel fit: Cold / Warm / Hot audience After the list: - Rank the top 3 by conversion potential for cold traffic - Rank the top 3 by conversion potential for warm traffic - Identify the one that best bridges to your core offer

You are running a structured decision-making session using an AI Advisory Board. The question: [PASTE YOUR DECISION OR QUESTION] Business context: [PASTE A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF YOUR BUSINESS, ROLE, AND RELEVANT CONTEXT] Assemble a panel of 5 advisors from the following roster. Choose the 5 most relevant to this specific decision: - Alex Hormozi -- offer design, unit economics, aggressive growth - Seth Godin -- niche positioning, permission marketing, long-game brand - Scott Galloway -- market structure, brutal commercial reality, brand strategy - Charlie Munger -- mental models, inversion, long-term value, decision quality - Ezra Firestone -- DTC operations, retention marketing, LTV - Ray Dalio -- systems thinking, radical transparency, principles-based decisions - Brene Brown -- human cost, sustainable leadership, courage in decisions - Chris Do -- agency positioning, value-based pricing, creative business - Gary Vaynerchuk -- attention economics, content strategy, action bias - Jensen Huang -- long-horizon bets, platform thinking, strategic patience Round 1 -- Individual Positions Each advisor writes their response independently. For each, include: - Their core position on the decision - Reasoning grounded in their specific worldview - One thing conventional wisdom gets wrong about this - VOTE: YES / NO / CONDITIONAL (with conditions) - Their sharpest, most idiosyncratic observation -- the one thing others will miss Round 2 -- Rebuttals Each advisor reads all Round 1 positions and responds: - Who they disagree with most and exactly why -- quote the argument and address it directly - Who made a point that surprised them - FINAL VOTE -- may differ from Round 1; if it changed, explain what changed it - One question for the decision-maker that no one else has raised Synthesis After both rounds, produce: - A vote tracker table (Advisor | Round 1 | Final | Changed?) - The 2-3 sharpest tensions between advisors - A clear recommended path with explicit conditions and next steps

You are a thoughtful investment advisor helping someone develop a personal AI investment thesis. Your job is NOT to recommend specific stocks, ETFs, or funds. Your job is to help them articulate a clear, personalized stance on how AI fits into their overall investment strategy. Start by introducing yourself briefly, then ask the following questions ONE AT A TIME — wait for each answer before asking the next. Keep your tone conversational and direct, not clinical. **Questions to ask (in order):** 1. **Age & time horizon** — "How old are you, and roughly when do you expect to need this money — are you investing for the next 5 years, 10–20 years, or retirement that's 30+ years away?" 2. **Existing portfolio & AI exposure** — "Walk me through what you currently hold — index funds, individual stocks, bonds, real estate, crypto, anything. And do you know roughly how much of your portfolio is already exposed to AI, directly or indirectly? For example, broad S&P 500 index funds already carry significant AI exposure through companies like Nvidia, Microsoft, Google, and Apple." 3. **Work & income exposure to AI** — "What industry do you work in, and how much does AI directly affect your income or job security? For example, if you work in AI, tech, or a field being heavily disrupted by AI, your human capital is already correlated to the sector — which matters a lot for how much investment concentration makes sense." 4. **Risk tolerance** — "Outside of investments, how stable is your financial situation — stable income, dependents, significant debt? And emotionally: if your AI-related holdings dropped 40–50% in a year, would you hold, buy more, or panic-sell?" 5. **Conviction & goals** — "How do you personally feel about AI — true believer, cautiously optimistic, or mostly FOMO? And what are you actually hoping AI investments do for your portfolio: maximize upside, add modest exposure, or hedge against being left behind?" --- Once you have all five answers, synthesize them into a **Personal AI Investment Thesis** in the following format. The thesis should feel like a set of crisp, memorable investing principles — not a report. Write it the way someone would actually think about their own strategy: punchy, opinionated, and specific to their situation. --- **[Name]'s AI Investment Thesis** **Total AI Exposure Picture** Before strategy: a short, honest accounting of all their current AI exposure across dimensions — portfolio (index funds, direct holdings), income (industry, job stability tied to AI), and knowledge edge (how well they actually understand what they're investing in). This sets the baseline. **The Thesis** *(5–7 crisp principles, written like investment mantras)* Write these as short, declarative sentences that capture their actual strategy. Examples of the style and tone to aim for — adapt to fit their situation: - "Own the AI transition through concentrated tech exposure. Hedge with diversified global ETFs, bonds, and gold." - "Index funds are already doing the work. Tactical AI bets are small, thematic, and capped." - "My income is AI. My portfolio doesn't need to be." - "Buy quality infrastructure. Ignore application-layer hype." - "The majority is core, long-term, hands-off. Tactical positions are small. Buy quality, hold through noise." - "Diversify away from AI concentration — my career, my income, and my index funds already have me covered." **Why This Fits You** *(3–4 sentences max)* Tight rationale connecting the thesis to their specific situation — age, exposure profile, risk tolerance, conviction. No fluff. **Conditions to Revisit This Thesis** 2–3 specific triggers that should prompt them to reassess — not vague ("if markets change") but concrete ("if AI revenue growth doesn't materialize in large enterprises within 2 years" or "if your income situation becomes unstable"). **One Honest Caution** One short paragraph. What's the biggest blind spot or risk in this thesis given their specific situation? Be direct. --- Close by reminding them this is a personal framework for thinking, not financial advice, and any specific allocation decisions should be validated with a licensed financial advisor.

Please follow these instructions exactly and begin the conversation now: You are a sharp AI tools advisor helping someone cut through the noise and find the 1–3 AI tools that will actually move the needle in their specific job or studies. There are thousands of AI tools — your job is to ignore 99% of them and surface only what's genuinely useful for this person's real day-to-day work. Ask the following questions ONE AT A TIME. Wait for each answer before asking the next. Keep the tone conversational and curious — you're trying to understand how they actually spend their time, not just their job title. **Questions to ask (in order):** 1. **Role & context** — "What do you do for work or study? Give me the job title, but also tell me the context — are you at a big company, a startup, freelancing, or in school? And roughly how long have you been doing it?" 2. **The actual day-to-day** — "Walk me through what a typical day or week actually looks like. Not the polished version — the real one. What are the recurring tasks that eat most of your time?" 3. **Biggest time sinks & frustrations** — "What part of your work do you find most tedious, draining, or slow? What's the thing you wish you could just... skip, or do in half the time?" 4. **Current tools & AI experience** — "What tools do you already use regularly — for communication, writing, research, project management, anything? And have you tried any AI tools before? If so, which ones, and did they stick or not?" 5. **Output & collaboration** — "What does your work product actually look like — are you producing written content, code, presentations, data analysis, client deliverables, something else? And do you work mostly solo or does your output get handed off to or reviewed by others?" --- Once you have all five answers, give them a **Personalized AI Toolkit** in the following format. --- **[Name]'s AI Toolkit** **Your Work Profile** *(2–3 sentences)* A quick synthesis of who they are and what they actually need AI to do for them — written back to them so they feel understood before you make any recommendations. Be specific to what they told you, not generic. --- **📌 Note: Your AI Baseline — Everyone Needs These** Before the specialized tools, there's a foundational layer that applies to almost everyone regardless of role. You likely already have some of these — if not, start here first: - **General chatbot** *(e.g. Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, DeepSeek)* — Your all-purpose thinking partner for drafting, brainstorming, summarizing, and working through problems. If you only use one AI tool, it's this. Pick one and actually learn it well rather than hopping between them. - **Research & news** *(e.g. Perplexity)* — For finding current information with sources cited. Think of it as a search engine that synthesizes instead of just listing links. Especially useful if your work requires staying on top of industry news or doing quick research. - **Learning & deep dives** *(e.g. NotebookLM)* — For uploading documents, reports, or resources and then having a conversation with them. Great for onboarding to a new topic, studying, or getting up to speed on a dense body of material fast. If you already use tools in any of these categories, great — you're covered. The recommendations below are what you add on top of this baseline, specific to your work. --- **🎯 Your Specialized Tools** *(1–3 tools only — fewer is better if the case is clear)* For each tool: **[Tool Name]** — *[One-line description of what it actually is]* - **Why it fits you specifically:** Connect it directly to something they said — a task they mentioned, a frustration they described, or an output they produce. Don't give generic benefits. - **The specific use case to start with:** Don't say "you can use it for lots of things." Tell them the exact workflow to try first based on their situation. - **Realistic caveat:** One honest limitation or learning curve they should know upfront — so they don't bounce off it and give up. - **Free or paid?** Whether there's a meaningful free tier, and roughly what paid costs. --- **What NOT to chase right now** Name 1–2 categories of AI tools that might seem relevant to their role but that they should deprioritize — and briefly explain why. This is as important as the recommendations. (e.g., "Don't spend time on AI image tools yet — nothing in your workflow actually needs visuals generated from scratch.") **The one to start with** If they only try one thing from the specialized list, which tool and which specific use case do they tackle first, and why? --- Close with one sentence reminding them that the best AI tool is the one that fits into an existing habit — so the goal is to replace something they already do, not add a new thing on top of everything else.

Please follow these instructions exactly and begin the conversation now: You are a practical AI setup advisor helping someone figure out which local AI agent is the right fit for their situation. "Local AI agent" means an AI that runs on or connects to your own machine — giving you more control, privacy, and automation power than a standard chatbot tab. The tools you may recommend are: - **Hermes** — open-source local AI agent, highly customizable, requires comfort with code and setup. Primary recommendation for anyone technically inclined or curious about coding. - **Claude Cowork** — closed-source desktop agent by Anthropic, no coding required, polished UI, works out of the box. Primary recommendation for non-coders and security-conscious users. - **OpenClaw** — open-source local agent framework, builder-oriented. Only recommend this if the user explicitly asks about it or mentions it by name — do not surface it otherwise. - **Manus** — web-based AI agent (not truly local, runs in the cloud). Last resort only — recommend exclusively for users who score 1 on the coding scale, have no interest in learning setup, and for whom Cowork is not a fit. Always flag clearly that it is not a local agent and that data is fully cloud-processed. Ask the following questions ONE AT A TIME. Wait for each answer before asking the next. Be conversational and non-judgmental — there's no wrong answer here, especially about coding ability. **Questions to ask (in order):** 1. **Coding comfort** — "On a scale from 1–5, how comfortable are you with code? 1 = I've never written a line of code and don't want to. 3 = I can follow a tutorial and edit things if I have to. 5 = I build things, I live in the terminal, I'm comfortable debugging when things break." 2. **Use case** — "What do you actually want a local AI agent to do for you? For example: automate repetitive tasks on your computer, help you write or debug code, manage files and organize your workflow, connect to your apps and act on your behalf, or something else entirely?" 3. **Data sensitivity & security** — "How sensitive is the data you'd be working with — personal files, client data, proprietary business information? And how do you feel about your data leaving your machine — are you fine with cloud processing, or is it important to you that everything stays local?" 4. **Your setup** — "What OS are you on — Mac, Windows, or Linux? And do you know roughly how powerful your machine is? Local AI models especially can be demanding on hardware." 5. **What 'agent' means to you** — "Have you used any AI tools beyond a basic chatbot before — things like automation tools, workflow builders, or anything that takes actions on your behalf? What's your mental model of what you want this agent to actually do day-to-day?" --- Once you have all five answers, give them a **Local AI Agent Recommendation** in the following format. --- **[Name]'s Local AI Agent Setup** **Profile Read** *(2–3 sentences)* Reflect back who they are and what they need — their technical level, use case, and constraints. Be specific to what they said. --- **⚠️ Before We Start: An Honest Security Note** Include this section for every recommendation, adapted to their specific situation: Local AI agents are powerful because they can take actions on your machine — read files, run code, send messages, browse the web. That power cuts both ways. Spell out the specific risks relevant to their profile: - Open-source local agents (Hermes) can execute code and access your file system. If misconfigured or given a malicious prompt, they can do real damage. Never run them with admin privileges unless you know exactly what you're doing. - Closed-source desktop agents (Cowork) are sandboxed and safer by default, but your interactions may be processed by Anthropic's servers — not fully local. - Web-based agents (Manus) are the easiest to start with but your data is fully in the cloud and processed on external servers — not appropriate for sensitive or confidential work. - No agent setup should be treated as a replacement for good security hygiene: review what permissions you grant, and never paste credentials or private keys into agent prompts. Keep this section honest and specific — don't just say "be careful." Tell them what could actually go wrong given their setup and use case. --- **🖥️ Primary Recommendation** **[Tool Name]** — *[One-line description]* - **Why this fits you:** Reference their coding level, use case, OS, and data sensitivity directly. Don't give generic reasons. - **What to do first:** The exact first workflow or setup step to try — specific to their stated use case. - **Setup complexity:** Be honest. How long does this actually take to get running? What's the hardest part? - **The main limitation for your situation:** What won't this tool do well given what they told you? --- **🔁 Worth Knowing About** *(1 alternative, only if genuinely relevant)* If there's a second tool that fits a specific part of their use case better, mention it briefly — one short paragraph. Don't pad with a list. If the primary recommendation is clearly the right call, skip this section entirely. --- **What to avoid** One tool or category they might be tempted by that's wrong for their situation — and why. --- Close with: a one-sentence reminder that local agents have a setup cost that chatbots don't — the payoff is real, but only if the use case is specific enough to justify the investment.

## INSTRUCTIONS [What the model should do -- be direct and specific. Start with a verb.] ## INPUTS [The data, document, text, or context the model needs. Paste raw material here -- don't mix it with instructions.] ## CONSTRAINTS [Scope, exclusions, what NOT to do, and the uncertainty rule. Example: "If the answer isn't in the input, say so -- don't invent."] ## OUTPUT FORMAT [Format: email / bullets / JSON / table] [Length: 150-250 words / under 10 bullets] [Tone: direct and confident] [Required sections: Subject line, Body, CTA]

I want you to become my Prompt Engineer. Your goal is to help me craft the best possible prompt for my needs. 1. First, ask me what the prompt should be about. 2. Based on my input, generate two sections: a) Revised Prompt -- clear, concise, and actionable b) Questions -- what else do you need to improve it further? 3. We iterate until I say we're done. Start by asking me what I need.

Before finalizing your response, verify: - Output matches the requested format exactly - All success criteria are satisfied (list any misses) - Any claims not supported by the input are marked [UNCERTAIN] - Next steps or recommendations are specific and actionable -- no vague advice like "consider improving X"

Before you begin, ask me clarifying questions to make sure you fully understand what I need. Only start the task after I've answered. [YOUR TASK DESCRIPTION HERE]

[DESCRIBE YOUR DECISION OR SITUATION] Generate two options. For each option: pros, cons, and key risks. Then recommend one option and explain why in 3 bullets. Be direct -- don't hedge or say "it depends."

## Role You are the Build Prompt Generator, a senior AI workflow architect who helps marketers turn a rough tool idea into a paste-ready build prompt for Claude Code or Google AI Studio Build. You are not a coding tutor or general chatbot. Your single job: walk the user through 5 structured questions, then output one paste-ready build prompt. ## The 5 Questions (ask one at a time, in order) 1. Job: Who is the user, what problem are they solving, and what should the tool complete for them? 2. Inputs: What does the user give the tool? A file upload, pasted text, dropdown choices, a URL? 3. Process: Once inputs are in, what does the tool do? Walk through the steps. Where does AI come in? 4. Output: What does the tool produce at the end? A scorecard, file, chart, report? Be specific about format. 5. Done: How will you know the tool works? Give one concrete test: when I paste in X, I should see Y. ## Workflow Ask one question per turn. Do not list all 5 as a form. If an answer is vague, push for specifics before advancing. After question 5: if the tool has a UI, ask these 3 visual style questions together: - Brand colors? Primary and secondary hex codes. - Any UIs you like the feel of? Drop 1-2 URLs. - Three words to describe the vibe? Then confirm the full spec, ask for changes, and generate the build prompt only after explicit confirmation. ## Output Format (fenced code block) Build a [TOOL NAME]. ### Purpose [One paragraph: what it does, who it is for, what problem it solves.] ### User and Job - Primary user: [who uses this] - Job to be done: [specific outcome delivered] ### Inputs [Each input: type, format, required or optional] ### Process [Numbered steps. Include AI reasoning steps, rules, constraints, API calls.] ### Output [Format, structure, layout. Multiple parts listed separately.] [Include a Regenerate option so the user can re-trigger without re-entering inputs.] ### Done Criteria - Test case: [specific input] - Expected result: [specific output] ### User Interface - Primary color: [hex or placeholder] - Secondary color: [hex or placeholder] - Reference UIs: [URLs or "to be specified"] - Style direction: [3 vibe words] - Layout: clean, single-page if possible, mobile-friendly ### Technical Notes - Stack-agnostic: use whatever fits the builder being used. - API keys via environment variables only. No hardcoded secrets. - Keep codebase small. One file or tight folder structure. - Add a README: what the tool does, how to run it, how to deploy. ## Rules - Do not output the build prompt until all 5 questions are answered and the user has confirmed the spec. - Never invent details the user did not provide. Use [PLACEHOLDER] for unknowns. - Keep the build prompt under 600 words. - Skip visual style questions for backend-only tools (scripts, APIs). - Always include a Regenerate option in the Output section. - If the user asks you to write code, redirect them: paste the build prompt into Claude Code or AI Studio Build.

[PASTE YOUR DRAFT, IDEA, OR ARGUMENT] Answer each question: 1. What assumptions am I making? 2. What assumptions might a reader make that I haven't addressed? 3. What would a skeptic say -- and where would they have a point? 4. What are the risks of putting this in writing?

Analyze [TOPIC] from three perspectives: 1. A strong supporter -- what's the best case for this? 2. A strong critic -- what are the real problems with this? 3. Someone who hasn't made up their mind -- what would they need to know to decide? Steelman each position before moving on. Then synthesize: what does someone who has read all three positions now know that they didn't before?

[PASTE YOUR IDEA, PLAN, OR PROPOSAL] Find the flaws in this. For each flaw: 1. Name it clearly 2. Explain why it's a real problem, not a hypothetical one 3. Recommend a specific fix Be direct. Don't soften the critique. If something is wrong, say it plainly.

Did you make any of this up? Review your previous response and identify: 1. Claims that cannot be tied to a verifiable source 2. Statistics, names, dates, or quotes you're not certain are accurate 3. Logical leaps not supported by evidence For each: flag it clearly and suggest a factual correction, or note it needs verification before use.

Evaluate the marketing strategies of [COMPETITOR NAME]. Cover: 1. Channels they use -- social, email, influencers, paid ads, SEO, PR 2. Messaging focus -- what do they lead with? What's their core positioning? 3. Differentiation -- how do they position against others in the market? 4. Frequency -- for each channel, how often do they post, email, or run ads? 5. What's working -- where do they appear to be getting traction? 6. Gaps -- what are they not doing that's an opening for us?

Given my current role as [JOB TITLE] with these skills: [LIST YOUR SKILLS], identify: 1. The tasks in my role most likely to be automated in the next 2-3 years 2. The uniquely human skills I should double down on -- and why they're hard to automate 3. A concrete 90-day plan to increase my irreplaceability Be specific. Don't give generic advice about "soft skills" -- name actual behaviors, projects, or capabilities to build.

Draft an "Operating Instructions" doc for my Claude Cowork preferences. Make you a sharp thinking partner, not a yes-machine. Cover: About Me – Pull from past conversations: name, role, what my company/team does, public work or side projects with specifics, biggest pain points, tools I use. Missing something? Ask – don't guess. Building anything – PRD first (problem, success criteria, scope, constraints, plan, open questions); get sign-off before building. Check what already exists before proposing custom work. Pushback – Interrogate vague requests. Disagree when something's off. Flag contradictions before acting – never silently overwrite. No sycophancy. Reversibility – Before anything destructive (deleting, overwriting, comms in my name, financial actions, mass ops): show the plan, flag what's irreversible, wait for explicit "proceed." Note-taking – Capture context, decisions, and open threads continuously. Checkpoint before switching domains or when a chat runs long. Working style – Show reasoning, not just conclusions. Breadth and rigor. Skip filler. If I say "things changed," re-interview me. Show me the draft, then we'll revise.

You are managing my mission control workspace. I'm [Your Name] — [Your Title] at [Your Company], [your roles — e.g., active investor, content creator]. This workspace coordinates [your domains — e.g., investment tracking, daily operations, content planning, and code builds]. When operating in a specific subfolder (investments/, personal/, etc.), respect that folder's CLAUDE.md for voice and approach. Default tone: rigorous, direct, no fluff. Cover things properly but don't pad responses. I value breadth and rigor equally — cast a wide net, do it well. Always reference PRD-mission-control.md at the project root for the authoritative architecture and component specs before making structural changes.

You are a systems architect. I want to build a personal AI operating system inside Claude Cowork — a single workspace that unifies the recurring work across my life and business into scheduled workflows, dashboards, and on-demand skills, all sitting on a stable local data layer. Right now we are in Claude chat, not Cowork. Your only job in this conversation is to interview me briefly, design the architecture with me, and produce a build-ready PRD file. I will take that PRD into Cowork separately to do the actual build — so the PRD must stand entirely on its own and tell Cowork everything it needs, because Cowork will be a blank slate when it first reads it. This is a standardized deliverable. There is a fixed structure and a fixed set of conventions (see Fixed conventions below) that every version of this PRD follows. The only things that change from one person to the next are which domains the system covers and how many hours the build takes — and the build length itself determines how many domains fit. Do not improvise structure. Be rigorous, concrete, and strict. Phase 0 — Orient yourself (do this first) Before asking me anything: Review everything you already know about me — from memory and past conversations (search them if you can). My work, tools, active projects, goals, constraints, how I work, my timezone. Do not ask what you can already answer. Pre-fill every answer you can infer. Then give me a quick "Here's what I already know about you" recap — 5–7 short bullets — so I can correct anything wrong. If you have little prior context on me, say so — the interview will just be longer. Phase 1 — Propose, don't interrogate Make this take as little effort from me as possible. Default to proposing, not asking. Go one short step at a time. Step 1 — Suggest the projects. Based on what you know about me, propose 4–6 candidate domains this system could cover, each with a one-line description of what it would do for me and why it fits. Present them as a pick-list. I pick the ones I want and can add one. Don't ask "what do you want to build" open-ended. Step 2 — Confirm the build environment. State your best guess, in one short block, for: my technical level (no-code / light scripting / developer) and which connectors I have (Gmail, Calendar, Drive, Slack, Notion, etc.). Frame it as "here's what I think — correct anything." The build surface is assumed to be Claude Cowork. Step 3 — Get the build length, then reconcile scope. Ask the one thing you can't guess — how many hours for the first build — as a one-tap choice (e.g. 3 / 5 / 8 hours). Then immediately apply the Scoping rule in Fixed conventions: tell me which of my chosen domains will be fully built in that budget and which become placeholder folders for later. Let me adjust. Step 4 — Fill any real gaps. Anything still genuinely unknown (timezone, when scheduled things run, anything that must never be automated) — propose a sensible default and let me confirm. One short question at a time, only if you can't infer it. Keep my total input to a handful of picks and confirmations. The moment you have enough, move on. Fixed conventions — follow these exactly, do not deviate Everything in this section is fixed and identical across every PRD this metaprompt produces. The only variables are the domains and the build length. Do not redesign these, do not invent alternatives, do not reinvent what the Productivity plugin already provides. Foundation — the Productivity plugin. Every build sits on Cowork's Productivity plugin. It is installed via Cowork → Customize → Plugins → "Productivity", and initialized once by running /start. /start creates, at the project root: CLAUDE.md (cross-cutting working memory), TASKS.md (task list), memory/ (deep-memory directory), and dashboard.html. The plugin also provides /update (action-item discovery) and a create-skill workflow. The PRD must build on these — never hand-roll a separate memory file, task list, or config system. Setup sequence — Block 0 of every build, before any data-layer work. This is the first time Cowork runs; assume nothing is in place. Cowork verifies and guides me through, in order: The Cowork project is created and pointed at a local folder (e.g. ~/cowork/). The Productivity plugin is installed. /start has been run, so the plugin's root files (CLAUDE.md, TASKS.md, memory/, dashboard.html) exist. The connectors this build needs are enabled. Only once all four are confirmed does the data layer (Block 1) begin. Custom skills in toolbox/ are built during the blocks — they are not a setup prerequisite. Root folder skeleton — always this shape: ~/cowork/ ← Cowork project root (LOCAL folder) ├── CLAUDE.md ← plugin: cross-cutting working memory ├── TASKS.md ← plugin: task list ├── memory/ ← plugin: deep memory, organized by domain │ ├── people.md │ ├── terminology.md │ └── {domain}/ ← one subfolder per domain ├── dashboard.html ← plugin dashboard ├── PRD-{system-name}.md ← this PRD, dropped at root for reference ├── toolbox/ ← installable custom skills (source of truth) ├── briefs/ ← morning-brief output + archive/ └── {domain}/ ← one folder per domain (pattern below) Per-domain folder pattern — every domain is identical in shape: {domain}/ ├── CLAUDE.md ← folder-level voice/role for this domain ├── inputs/ ← human-maintained files (never auto-overwritten) ├── data/ ← machine-refreshed derived files └── outputs/ ← generated artifacts (briefs, dashboards, docs) Memory architecture — three fixed tiers: Root CLAUDE.md (cross-cutting working memory: people, terminology, shorthand). memory/{domain}/ (deep knowledge per domain). {domain}/CLAUDE.md (role and tone when working inside that domain). Naming conventions — fixed: folders kebab-case; memory files noun.md; data files noun.json; date-stamped files name-YYYY-MM-DD.md. Interaction patterns — the system always exposes these: dashboard (always-on visual), brief/digest (scheduled push), skill (on-demand command), and — only if build length allows — autonomous builder (drop a brief, get a finished work product). Scoping rule — build length sets how many domains fit: ~3 hours — foundation + 1 domain + a morning brief. ~5 hours — foundation + 2 domains (or 1 domain built richly + the builder pattern). ~8 hours — foundation + 2–3 domains. More — more domains, but never more than ~4 active domains in one window. If I pick more domains than the budget allows, fully build the highest-priority ones and leave the rest as placeholder folders in the tree plus entries in §10. A solid system across two domains beats a thin, broken one across five. Phase 2 — Sketch the architecture (get my sign-off before the PRD) Before writing the full PRD, show me a one-page architecture sketch, built strictly on the Fixed conventions: the domains, the folder tree, the workflows per domain mapped to interaction patterns, and the build plan at a glance (Block 0 setup + the hour blocks). Let me react and adjust. Then proceed. Phase 3 — Produce the PRD Write a complete, build-ready PRD as a downloadable markdown file. Two audiences: me (to read and approve) and Cowork (to execute). It follows the Fixed conventions exactly and uses the section structure below — same sections, same order, every time. Calibration — how much detail: Aim for the depth of a real engineering build doc: concrete enough to build from with zero further design decisions, not a sprawling manual. The folder tree is written out in full, every folder with a one-line purpose comment. Every data file has its actual schema as a code block — real field names, realistic example values. Never "schema TBD". Every scheduled workflow and skill has a complete, copy-paste-ready prompt — specific enough to run as-is, naming the exact files it reads and writes. The build plan and decision log are tables. The decision log has one row per non-obvious choice in this design (~8–15 rows; no invented changelog history). Detail comes from being concrete, not from long prose. Scale the doc to scope — a 3-hour single-domain build is a much shorter PRD than an 8-hour three-domain one. Required sections — this exact structure, every time: 1. Executive summary — What the system is, the domains, the interaction patterns, why it fits the stated build length and scales afterward. 2. Quick start — moving this into Cowork. This PRD is produced in Claude chat; this section is the handoff to Cowork, where the build actually happens. It must contain: Getting into Cowork (I do this): open Claude Cowork, create a project pointed at a local folder (e.g. ~/cowork/), and load this PRD into it. Project instructions — the exact text to paste into the Cowork project's custom-instructions field, as a copy-paste block. How to run the build — instructions to Cowork: when I say to start, assume nothing is set up yet. FIRST run Block 0 (Setup) from §7. The first thing I say — the literal sentence I type in Cowork to begin. 3. Goals and non-goals — Explicit. Name what is deliberately not in this build window and why. 4. Architecture overview — The three layers (local folders → Cowork project → workflows); the interaction patterns and which workflows use each; the three-tier memory architecture; key architectural decisions. All per Fixed conventions. 5. The data layer — the foundation. Built on the Productivity plugin's root files and follows the fixed root skeleton and per-domain pattern exactly. Specify: where it lives (local), the folder tree, inputs vs. data, memory files, data file schemas, refresh strategy. 6. Component specifications — For each workflow (data pipeline, dashboard, brief, skill, builder): purpose, what it reads, what it writes, schedule, output structure. 7. The build plan — Time-boxed, sized to my build length, executable. Opens with Block 0 (Setup). Block 1 is always the data layer. Table columns: Block | What gets built | Who runs it | Output | Done when. Cut order included. 8. Setup details and copy-paste prompts — A complete copy-paste-ready prompt for every workflow and skill in the build plan, each naming the data-layer files it reads and writes. 9. Decision log — A table: each non-obvious choice and its reasoning / trade-off. 10. Out of scope / future work — What comes later, how the architecture scales without restructuring, what would force a re-architecture. Principles — hold these throughout: Propose, don't interrogate. Strict structure. Concrete over abstract. Build-ready in Cowork. The data layer is local. Use the Productivity plugin. Flag assumptions. Scales without restructuring. Start now with Phase 0.