Work prompts

All Work prompts

Turn this into a one-page decision memo: [paste notes]. Structure, in this order: the decision needed (one sentence), the two options with the cost of each, what I recommend, what would change my mind, and the deadline. No background section. If a fact is missing, list it at the bottom as an open question instead of inventing it.

From these notes: [paste], extract every action. For each: the action, the owner, the date, and the sentence in the notes that supports it. If the owner or date isn't stated, write UNASSIGNED or NO DATE — do not infer. Only include an item if someone committed to do it; a person who reports a problem is not automatically the owner, and a stated date is context, not an action. Do not turn "we discussed X" or a launch date into an action. Then list anything discussed that produced no action, because that's usually where the real gap is.

Rewrite this email: [paste]. The reader is [role], they are busy, and they are likely to misread it as [likely misreading]. Keep it under 120 words. Put the ask in the first line. Then tell me which sentence is most likely to be quoted back at me out of context.

Here's the thread: [paste]. Produce a status update with exactly three sections: Decided (with who decided), Undecided (with what's blocking it), and Nobody has raised this yet (risks visible in the thread but unaddressed). Quote the line that supports each Decided item.

It's [date, six months out] and this plan failed: [describe plan]. Write the post-mortem. What happened, in order? Which of these was most likely: we solved the wrong problem, we underestimated a dependency, we lost a person, we shipped late, or nobody owned it? Then give me the one check I could run this week that would have caught it.

I need approval for [thing]. The approver knows [what they know] and doesn't know [what they don't]. Write the brief in this order: what I need from you (one line), why now, what it costs, what happens if we don't, and the three questions you'll probably ask with my answers. Under 250 words.

Here's what happened on [project]: [paste]. Identify the single process change that would have prevented the biggest problem. Then tell me: what it costs, who it inconveniences, and how we'd know in two weeks whether it worked. Ignore everything that would only produce a nicer document.

I'm chairing [meeting] with [attendees] for [duration]. The decision we need is [decision]. Write an agenda where every item exists to move that decision: item, who leads, minutes, and what "done" looks like. If an item doesn't move the decision, cut it and tell me what you cut.

Here is everything I know about [topic], as I would say it out loud: [brain dump]. First turn it into an outline where every heading is a question the reader will actually ask, and stop there so I can approve it. After I approve, take one section at a time. For the section I name: write the draft, then state in one line what claim it lands and what evidence it uses. If a section needs a fact I have not given you, list it as missing instead of filling the gap. Do not write ahead to the next section.

We have been working on [project]. Write a restart brief I could paste into a new chat: the goal, the decisions we made and why, the constraints we discovered the hard way, the open questions, and the three things you would need me to restate. Leave out anything that was only true for the last message. Then tell me which of my instructions were redundant, so I stop repeating them.

I am pasting [N] documents that all describe the same kind of record in different formats: [paste]. Build one table with these columns: [columns]. Rules, in order: quote the exact source text behind every cell; if a document does not state a field, write NOT STATED; if two documents disagree, put both values with their sources and mark the row CONFLICT; never convert a unit or a date format silently, show the original beside the conversion. Add a final column for what a person should check by hand.

Here is an instruction I keep giving: [instruction]. Act as a temporary colleague on your first day, with no background in [domain]. List every question you would need answered before you could start, in the order you would hit them. Then rewrite the instruction so those questions are answered inside it, without making it longer than [N] words. Keep my intent identical, and if answering a question would change what I am asking for, flag it instead of deciding for me.

Here is how [process] actually gets done, explained the way I would explain it to someone shadowing me: [description]. Write it as an SOP with numbered steps. At every point where I would have to make a judgement call, insert a DECISION block with four lines: the trigger, the options, who can approve each one, and what happens if nobody answers. Then list every step where I said usually or normally, because those need a rule rather than a habit.

Task: [describe the job]. Before you do any of it, reply with only four things: what you think the deliverable is, which part of my description is ambiguous and how you would resolve it, the order you will work in, and up to three things you would ask me if you could. Then stop. I will confirm or correct, and you start only after that.

Here is the data I was given: [paste sample rows, or describe columns and types]. For each column, check for: values that could be a placeholder rather than a real value (repeated round numbers, `0`, `-1`, `9999`, epoch dates), blank versus zero and whether they mean the same thing, duplicate rows, inconsistent spelling of the same category, units stated or missing, and dates in more than one format. Return a table: column, what I should check, what I would see if it were broken, and a verdict of `usable`, `usable with caveat`, or `do not aggregate`. Then list the three checks I must do against an outside total before publishing anything.

These are the requests and ideas on my list: [paste]. For each one, run this test: could it be addressed in more than one way? If yes, rewrite it as an opportunity — the underlying need, stated from the customer's side, in their words if I have them. If no, label it a solution and name the opportunity it is trying to serve. Return a table: original item, verdict (`opportunity` or `solution`), rewrite, and the evidence I would need to know it is real. Then group the opportunities that are actually the same need, and flag any that I have no customer evidence for beyond the request itself.

You are reviewing [document type] as the [role]. Raise only what your role would be accountable for at sign-off. For each item: quote the line, say what could go wrong, and label it BLOCKER, MUST-ANSWER, or NIT. If an issue belongs to a different role, name that role and stop there. End with one line: I would / would not sign this off, because [reason]. Document: [paste]

Every prompt assumes you will replace the brackets. If you copy one unchanged, you have borrowed someone else’s brief.