Claude Prompts

Analyse the attached document and produce a structured summary following these exact requirements: Format: - Title: [document title and date] - Type: [report/article/research paper/other] - Summary: 3 sentences maximum, covering the main argument and conclusion - Key claims: Numbered list of 5-7 specific claims made, each one sentence - Evidence quality: Rate the evidence for each claim as Strong/Moderate/Weak with one-sentence justification - Gaps: 2-3 things the document does not address but should - Reliability: Your overall assessment of the document's credibility (1-2 sentences) Constraints: - Do not use hedging language like "it could be argued" or "perhaps" - If you are uncertain about something, say "I am not certain" explicitly - Do not pad — use fewer words rather than more [paste document]

Here are three paragraphs written in my voice: [paste example 1] [paste example 2] [paste example 3] Now write [new content — e.g. an introduction to a blog post about X] in exactly this voice. Match: sentence length, vocabulary level, use of first person, any signature phrases, and structural patterns. Constraints: - Do not make it sound more formal than the examples - Do not add transitional phrases like "In conclusion" or "Furthermore" - If you are unsure about a voice element, match the most common pattern in the examples rather than guessing

Review the following [language] code with a focus on [security/performance/readability/correctness]. I am a [junior/mid-level/senior] developer. [paste code] Provide: 1. Overall rating: [1-10] with one-sentence justification 2. Critical issues (must fix before production): numbered list, each with the line number, the problem, and the corrected code 3. Recommended improvements: numbered list, each with justification 4. What is done well: 2-3 specific things Constraints: - Be direct — do not soften criticism - Flag if any issue is a security vulnerability explicitly - If the code is genuinely good, say so — do not invent issues

Research question: [your question] Please answer this question drawing on your training data. For each factual claim you make: - Mark high-confidence claims with [HIGH] - Mark moderate-confidence claims with [MODERATE] - Mark low-confidence or uncertain claims with [UNCERTAIN: reason] At the end, list 3-5 specific questions I should verify with current sources before relying on this information. Do not present uncertain information confidently. If you do not know something, say so explicitly.

Edit the following text according to these priorities (in order): 1) Clarity, 2) Concision, 3) Active voice, 4) Specific over vague language. [paste your text] Format your response as: EDITED VERSION: [the improved text] CHANGES MADE: - [original phrase] → [revised phrase] — [reason in 5 words or less] (list all significant changes) Constraints: - Do not change my meaning — only improve expression - Flag any sentence where you are unsure of my intended meaning - Preserve any deliberate stylistic choices (I will tell you if you changed something I wanted to keep)