Writing & Editing Prompts

Help me draft a sensitive email. Recipient: [recipient and relationship, e.g., key client, supervisor, partner]. Core message: [the difficult news, e.g., declining a request, announcing a delay, flagging a disagreement, requesting payment]. Context: [relevant history]. Priorities: [what to protect, e.g., the relationship, the contract, my credibility]. Desired outcome: [what the recipient should do or understand].

Draft the email: use a neutral but specific subject line, state the main point within the first 3 lines (do not bury it under pleasantries), lead with facts rather than interpretations, and end with a concrete next step or deadline.

Provide two variations: one more direct and one softer, explaining when to use each. Maximum length: 12 lines. No fluff or pre-emptive apologies.

Summarize the following document for [recipient, e.g., an executive with 5 minutes] who needs to decide on [decision to be made].

Document: [paste text]

Format: The bottom line in 5 lines max (key takeaway if they read nothing else), key figures in a table (data point, value, source in text), decision points with available options, gray areas or internal contradictions (cite specific passages), and what the document fails to address that is needed for the decision.

Rules: Do not introduce outside information, clearly distinguish between what the document states vs. suggests, and if a section contradicts the final conclusion, highlight that first.

Rewrite the following text in Plain English. Context: [type of text, e.g., website page, internal memo, client letter] for [reader]. Objective: [what the reader should understand or do].

Text to rewrite: [paste text]

Rules: One idea per sentence, average sentence length of 20 words or fewer, active voice, replace jargon with everyday words ([list jargon to keep if necessary, e.g., industry terms the reader knows]), remove filler phrases (e.g., 'in order to', 'it is important to note that', 'with reference to'), and retain all facts and figures.

Output: The rewritten text, a list of major simplifications that impact tone or nuance (for verification), and the word count before/after.

Prepare a script for my upcoming talk. Occasion: [e.g., team kickoff, product launch, industry panel]. Duration: [length]. Audience: [who they are and their likely mindset]. Key messages: [2 or 3 max]. My natural style: [e.g., understated, enthusiastic, humorous].

Write for the ear: short sentences that can be spoken in one breath, simple words, intentional repetition of key points, and explicit transitions. Structure: A hook that isn't a generic 'thank you' or a cliché quote (start with a fact, an anecdote about [experience], or a question), a body organized by message with one concrete example each, and a conclusion that restates THE main message and ends on a memorable closing line.

Include pacing cues (pauses, slow down) and a version condensed by 50% in case the schedule runs over.

Adapt the following text, originally written for [original audience], to work for [new audience, e.g., the board, frontline staff, non-technical clients, general public].

Original text: [paste text]

Required changes: Adjust the level of detail (this audience needs [e.g., decision/impact vs. precise SOP vs. high-level overview]), vocabulary (translate technical or internal jargon, listing these separately), examples (replace with scenarios this audience encounters), and the lead (start with what matters to THIS audience: [primary concern]).

What must remain: Facts, figures, and commitments. Deliver the adapted text, then provide a 3-line summary of what was sacrificed (lost nuances or omitted details) so I can judge if it is acceptable.

I sent an email to [recipient and relationship, e.g., a prospect, a colleague in another department, a vendor] regarding [original subject] on [date], with no response. Stakes: [what is blocked until I hear back]. History: [previous interactions].

Draft 3 follow-ups to be sent over time: 1. A light nudge (restate context in one sentence, easy closed question). 2. A value-add (provide a useful update, reframe the request, or offer an alternative). 3. A final check-in (set a deadline and state what I will do if I don't hear back, without being passive-aggressive).

Constraints: 6 lines max per email, no blame (use 'following up on this' rather than 'you haven't replied'), one question per message, keep the same email thread. Suggest the recommended delay between each follow-up.

I need to request [nature of request, e.g., budget, new hire, project prioritization, training, organizational change] from my manager. Context: [current situation and why now]. Cost: [money, time, or risk]. ROI: [concrete benefit for the team or company]. Manager's style: [e.g., data-driven, bottom-line, detail-oriented].

Draft the email: clear subject line stating the request, context in 3 lines max, the request stated explicitly (not hinted at), options considered with my reasoned recommendation, and the specific decision needed by when.

Constraints: 15 lines max, no complaining, facts over opinions, anticipate the main objection in one sentence ([likely objection]). Also provide a 6-line version for a quick-turnaround topic.

Draft a thank-you email following [type of meeting, e.g., job interview, initial sales call, networking coffee] with [person and role]. Highlights: [2 or 3 specific points discussed]. Desired next step: [e.g., moving to the next interview round, a second meeting, an introduction].

The email must: thank them sincerely in one sentence (no flattery), reference ONE specific point from the conversation to show active listening, provide a small useful item if possible ([resource, example, or info promised during the talk]), and propose the next step clearly.

Constraints: 8 lines max, do not mention 'sending this within 24 hours', avoid clichés like 'incredible opportunity', and do not recap your entire resume or pitch. Provide a professional version and a slightly warmer version.

I received an aggressive or accusatory email. Sender and relationship: [who they are and why they matter]. Message received: [paste email]. The facts from my side: [what actually happened, with dates]. My share of responsibility: [what I admit to, or none].

Draft a response that: ignores personal attacks entirely, recaps the facts chronologically with dates, acknowledges valid points without defensiveness, calmly corrects inaccuracies by citing specific evidence, and pivots the conversation toward a concrete next step ([solution or meeting proposal]).

Constraints: 12 lines max, no irony, no all-caps for emphasis, no 'I understand your frustration but' phrases. Short sentences. If the received message contains legal or contractual threats, flag this for me and recommend a legal review before sending.

I am going on [type of leave, e.g., vacation, business trip, parental leave] from [start date] to [return date]. Active files: [list of projects with status and next deadline]. Coverage: [person(s) and their scope]. Non-urgent items: [what can wait].

Draft two items. 1. Automated OOO message: dates, contact info for different types of requests, no personal details about the leave. 2. Handoff email to colleagues: a table for each file (project, status, next action, deadline, contact, document location), 2 or 3 known pitfalls, and my availability policy (e.g., 'not reachable' or 'text only for [emergency criteria]').

Constraints: OOO message in 5 lines max, handoff is exhaustive but concise, all actionable items in a table.

Draft an invitation for a meeting about [topic]. Participants: [list and roles]. Duration: [length]. Desired outcome: [what must be decided or produced, e.g., a choice between two options, a signed-off plan]. Points to cover: [raw list].

Structure: Subject line containing the topic AND meeting type (Decision, Info, Workshop), 2 lines of context, the desired outcome in one sentence ('By the end of this meeting, we will have...'), a timed agenda (point, duration, lead, outcome/info), required prep for each person, and a note on what was removed from the agenda to stay on time.

Constraints: The meeting must fit in [duration], so suggest moving points that don't require everyone to email. Neutral tone, no consultant jargon.

Draft an email announcing a price increase for [Company] clients. Who is affected: [all or specific segment]. The change: [old price, new price or percentage], effective [date]. Real reason: [e.g., rising costs, service upgrades, first adjustment in X years]. Cushion: [e.g., price locked until X date, new feature added, or nothing].

The email must: announce the hike in the first paragraph (not after self-praise), give the reason in one or two honest sentences without drama, quantify exactly what changes for the reader (before, after, when), briefly remind them of the value received, and state who to contact with questions.

Constraints: 15 lines max, no evasive language ('prices may be subject to change'), no 'fake' good news. Provide a variation for clients under contract whose price won't change until renewal.

Draft the welcome email for a new client of [Company] following the signing of [service/product]. Our team: [who does what: account manager, project lead, support]. Onboarding steps: [steps and typical timelines]. What we need from them: [documents, access, info].

Structure: A one-sentence thank you, a recap of what was purchased and the client's goal in their own words ([goal expressed by client]), next steps as a dated list (what, who, when), a checklist of what we need from them with a deadline, the right contact for different queries, and a note on the kickoff meeting ([date or scheduling link]).

Constraints: 20 lines max, zero superlatives (use 'delighted' once max), the client must be able to act immediately. Include a subject line.

Draft an internal memo for [Company/Department]. Subject: [change or rule, e.g., new office hours, procurement approval process, tool usage policy]. Affected staff: [who]. Effective date: [date]. Reason for change: [real motive]. Replacement: [what this replaces, if applicable].

Structure: Factual title, the new rule stated in the first 2 lines, who is affected and when, concrete daily impact (before/after table if multiple cases), planned exceptions and who approves them, and contact for questions.

Constraints: One page max, short sentences, no 'it is requested that', no patronizing tone, reason explained in 2 honest sentences. If this affects employment contracts or handbooks, add a note that HR or legal review is required before distribution.

Turn the following information into a written SOP for [task, e.g., processing an order, publishing to the site, closing the register]. User: [reader profile, e.g., new hire with no context]. Frequency: [how often]. Process details: [raw description of how it's done]. Tools: [software, access needed].

Output: Task objective in one sentence, prerequisites (access, equipment, info needed), numbered steps (one action per step, starting with a verb, with the visible result confirming success), checkpoints ('if you don't see X, stop'), the 3 most likely errors and how to fix them, and who to contact if stuck.

Constraints: No implicit steps (don't say 'configure the tool', say where to click), consistent vocabulary (the same button has the same name throughout). Flag areas where my description is too vague to write a step.

Turn my call notes into a summary email for the other party. Recipient: [name, company, role]. Call context: [reason for the call]. Raw notes: [paste notes, even if bullet points]. Goal: [what to secure in writing, e.g., verbal agreement, announced deadline, a disagreement].

Draft the email: One sentence of context (date and subject of call), points discussed in a short list, decisions or agreements stated unambiguously ('You confirmed that...', 'We agreed to...'), commitments from each party with deadlines, and a request for confirmation ('Unless I hear otherwise by [timeframe], we will proceed on this basis').

Constraints: 15 lines max, clearly distinguish what was SAID from what I INFERRED, do not add anything not in my notes, neutral tone. This is a record for potential disputes: factual only.

Draft a decision memo on [topic, e.g., switching vendors, opening a new role, sunsetting a product]. Decision-maker: [who]. Options studied: [options with known cost, timeline, risks]. Criteria: [what matters and relative weight]. Decision or recommendation: [chosen option]. Deciding factor: [what tipped the scales].

Structure: Context and the question in 4 lines, options table (option, cost, expected benefit, main risk, reversibility), decision criteria and weighting, the decision and justification in one paragraph, known risks being accepted, review date to check if it was the right choice ([date]), and immediate next steps.

Constraints: One page max, written to be read in 6 months by someone not present (no allusions to undocumented talks), rejected options treated fairly. 

Build the internal FAQ for [tool or process, e.g., the new CRM, expense reporting, room booking]. Users: [who and their skill level]. Common questions: [list of questions already asked]. Official rules: [limits, approvals needed]. Resource locations: [links or paths].

Produce the FAQ: Rephrase questions as people actually ask them ('How do I...' not 'Procedure for...'), group by scenario (getting started, common tasks, troubleshooting, edge cases), 5-line max answer per question starting with the action, link to resources where they exist, and a catch-all final question ('If your case isn't here, contact [who]').

Constraints: No 'see documentation' without a specific link, no fake questions. End with the 3 questions from my list whose answers require clarifying a vague rule.

I am leaving my role as [position] at [Company] on [date] and must write a handoff for [successor: identified or unknown]. Responsibilities: [list]. Active files: [status]. Key contacts: [internal/external with relationship context]. Routines: [recurring tasks and frequency]. Tribal knowledge: [informal info: pitfalls, sensitive history, where things are hidden].

Structure the document: The role in 5 lines (mission, scope, reporting line), routine calendar (daily, weekly, monthly, annual with critical dates), active files table (file, status, next action, deadline, risk if ignored), annotated contact list, access and tools (no passwords: list the official recovery process), and a 'what I wish I knew when I started' section.

Constraints: Factual, no personal judgments on people, professional enough to be read by management.

Draft an internal policy on [topic, e.g., generative AI usage, remote work, equipment use, social media] for [Company size/sector]. Encouraged uses: [what we want to allow]. Risks to avoid: [e.g., client data leaks, unauthorized commitments]. Existing constraints: [handbook, data privacy laws, trade secrets].

Structure: Who it applies to, principles in 3 or 4 sentences (spirit over letter), rules in 'Do' and 'Don't' lists with one concrete example each, cases requiring prior approval and from whom, what to do in case of doubt or incident, and the next review date.

Constraints: 2 pages max, no unenforceable rules (e.g., 'use common sense'), no 'policing' tone, every restriction linked to a risk. Add a header stating the document must be reviewed by legal or HR before distribution.

Draft an incident report for the following event. Nature: [e.g., outage, delivery error, data loss, minor accident]. Raw timeline: [what I know, with timestamps]. Impact: [who/what was affected, for how long]. Immediate actions: [what was done]. Identified or suspected causes: [distinguish between certain and assumed]. Recipients: [management, client, insurer, team].

Structure: 5-line summary (what, when, impact, current status), timestamped timeline table, quantified impact where possible (if unknown, state 'not yet quantified'), cause analysis separating facts from hypotheses, corrective actions with owner and deadline, and prevention plan.

Constraints: No names in 'blame' positions (describe process failures, not individual faults), no dramatic adjectives, every claim linked to a source ('per logs', 'according to X'). If the incident has insurance or legal implications, recommend a legal review before external release.

Help me structure the technical proposal for our response to the RFP [subject] by [buyer, public or private]. Our company: [activity, size, relevant refs]. Scoring criteria: [criteria and weighting]. RFP requirements: [highlights]. Our strengths: [differentiators]. Our weaknesses: [where we might be challenged].

Produce: A proposal outline mirrored to the scoring criteria (one section per scored criterion, using the buyer's terminology), for each section the evidence to include (refs, CVs, tools, method) and pitfalls to avoid, a plan to address weaknesses honestly (mitigation/scaling plan), and an administrative compliance checklist.

Constraints: Ban generalities ('we put the client first'), every claim must require evidence. Do not invent reference numbers: use [to be completed] placeholders.

Write a profile for [Company]. Activity: [what it sells, to whom]. Relevant history: [founding, milestones, verifiable only]. Usable data: [headcount, locations, years in business, clients served: only what is exact]. Real differentiator: [what sets it apart]. Usage: [website, brochure, sales deck, LinkedIn].

Deliver 3 versions: Long (~200 words for 'About' page), Medium (~80 words for decks or proposals), Short (~25 words for profiles or footers). All three must cover: who we serve, what we do for them, what makes us different, and one piece of proof.

Constraints: Absolute bans on: 'leader', 'leading provider', 'innovative solutions', 'passionate', 'DNA'. No unprovided figures. Use present tense, short sentences, and make the client the subject of at least one sentence (what THEY get). Flag missing info that weakens the text.

Condense our pitch into a one-page leave-behind document. Offer: [product/service, price/range]. Target: [buyer, decision-maker]. Problem solved: [in the client's words]. How we solve it: [mechanism in plain English]. Proof: [refs, testimonials, guarantees, data]. Top objection: [what we hear every time].

Structure: A headline stating the main benefit (not the product name), the problem in 3 lines that make them say 'that's us', the solution in 3 concrete points, a proof block (strongest first), the answer to the top objection in 2 lines without naming it heavily, the offer/price, and a single CTA with contact info.

Constraints: 250 words max, readable in 90 seconds, no sentence over 20 words, no superlatives without proof. Suggest visual hierarchy (what to bold, box, or list).

Write my professional bio. Career path: [roles, companies, years, relevant education]. Current role: [position and responsibilities]. Verifiable achievements: [2 or 3]. Usage context: [e.g., company site, conference program, brochure, training intro]. Desired impression: [e.g., reliable expert, legitimate leader].

Deliver 3 formats: Full bio (~120 words, third person), Oral intro for a moderator (~60 words, spoken rhythm), One-liner signature (role + angle, 15 words max).

Constraints: Start with what serves the usage context, not the oldest degree; no fluff ('passionate', 'expert' without proof); use only provided facts; ensure consistency across formats. Ask me 3 questions if info is missing to make the bio credible.

Rewrite the 'About' section of my LinkedIn profile. My business: [role, company or freelance]. Target audience: [who I want to reach, e.g., recruiters in X sector, prospects of Y type]. Desired action: [contact me for what]. Career highlights: [verifiable achievements]. Natural tone: [e.g., professional, direct, warm].

Structure: A 2-line hook visible BEFORE the 'see more' click that says who I help and how, a paragraph on what I actually do (typical missions, no inflated titles), a proof paragraph (quantified achievements only if provided), a sentence on my working style, and a CTA with a legitimate reason to reach out.

Constraints: 150 words max, first person, no buzzword lists, no emojis unless specified ([yes/no]), no 'feel free to'. Also provide 3 profile headline options (120 chars max).

Write a press release for [Company]. The announcement: [e.g., launch, partnership, opening, appointment, funding]. Verifiable facts: [dates, locations, figures, names]. The 'News' angle for a journalist: [why it matters externally: industry first, local impact, trend]. Spokesperson: [name, role]. Target media: [local, trade, national].

Structure: Informative headline under 12 words (the fact, not promo), lead paragraph answering who/what/where/when/why, two body paragraphs in inverted pyramid style (most important first), a spokesperson quote that adds perspective (not just 'we are proud'), company boilerplate, press contact, and date.

Constraints: One page max, no superlatives, no unprovided data, written as a ready-to-run article. Provide 2 alternative headlines with different angles.

Write a LinkedIn post for [me or company]. Topic: [e.g., lesson learned from a project, announcement, industry point of view, case study]. Material: [facts, anecdote, or data]. Target reader: [who should care]. Goal: [visibility, debate, hiring, leads]. My tone: [e.g., professional, direct, personal].

Structure: A 1-2 line hook that makes them click 'see more' without clickbait, spaced-out body (1-3 line paragraphs, one idea each), a closing that takes a stand or asks a specific question (not a generic 'what do you think?').

Constraints: 1300 chars max, no manufactured 'sob stories', no life lessons from mundane events, no 'I don't usually post but', zero hashtags in the middle (3 max at the end). Deliver 2 versions: one factual, one more personal in the first person.

Prepare a voicemail script for when [target, e.g., prospect, unreachable client, candidate] doesn't pick up. Context: [why I'm calling]. Existing relationship: [none/warm]. Desired outcome: [call back, time slot, confirmation]. Company: [name and activity in one word].

Write for the ear: Who I am in one sentence, the reason for the call framed by THEIR interest, the requested action with my number stated slowly (twice: middle and end), and an out ('if X handles this, let me know').

Constraints: 30 seconds max spoken aloud (~75 words), no phrases you wouldn't say naturally on the phone, no artificial teasing ('I have something important to tell you'). Deliver 3 variants: first call, second message after silence, final message before stopping follow-ups.

We messed up with a client and I need to write an apology. The failure: [e.g., delay, error, broken promise, poor quality]. The client: [who, tenure, importance]. Impact: [concrete cost to them]. Our responsibility: [full or shared, with facts]. Resolution: [e.g., partial refund, redo, credit, or nothing to offer].

Draft the message: Acknowledge the problem in the first sentence using the client's words for the issue (not 'any inconvenience caused'), give a 2-3 line factual explanation without blaming third parties, state the concrete resolution and date, explain what changed to prevent a repeat (real measure, not intention), and offer a direct contact for discussion.

Constraints: 15 lines max, no 'rest assured' platitudes, no excessive self-flagellation, no unverifiable promises. If the client mentions financial or legal damages, recommend legal review before sending.

Draft responses to online reviews for [Company, Sector] on [Platform, e.g., Google Business, Trustpilot]. Reviews: [paste reviews with ratings]. Real context for each: [what actually happened]. Sign-off: [who signs, e.g., Manager, Customer Success].

For negative reviews: Thank them professionally, restate the specific issue (show you read it), provide the factual version if different (without calling them a liar), pivot to a private channel with specific contact info, and write for the prospect reading this later. For positive reviews: A short, specific response referencing a detail in their review; never use the same response twice.

Constraints: 6 lines max per response, no copy-pasting, no disclosure of personal client data (data privacy: do not discuss their specific file in public), no counter-attacks. Flag reviews that seem defamatory for separate reporting.

Draft a termination letter for [contract, e.g., software sub, service agreement, insurance, commercial lease] with [provider]. References: [contract/client number, start date]. Reason: [real reason, or 'without cause' if permitted]. Contract terms on termination: [notice period, end date if known]. Desired end date: [date].

Structure: Subject line with contract ref, explicit declaration of termination ('I am terminating' not 'I would like to'), effective date based on notice period, requests for written confirmation (effective end date, final payment, data/equipment return: [points to secure]), and professional sign-off.

Constraints: One page max, neutral tone even if the relationship soured (this is a legal record), no superfluous arguments. Remind me to check the required delivery method (Certified Mail, portal, etc.) and to seek legal counsel for high-value contracts.

Draft a complaint to our vendor [Vendor] regarding [issue: non-compliant delivery, repeated delays, billing error, quality drop]. Facts: [dates, order refs, what was agreed, what was observed]. Evidence: [PO, photos, emails, reports]. Business impact: [concrete consequences]. Demand: [replacement, credit, discount, action plan]. Firmness level: [first warning or repeat offense].

Structure: Recap of the framework (contract/order ref), observed facts in a dated list referencing attachments, the gap between agreement and reality (cite clause or promise), factual impact, specific demand with a response deadline ([timeframe]), and a note on next steps if unresolved (stated soberly, no empty legal threats).

Constraints: 20 lines max, separate facts from feelings, maintain a tone that allows for continued work if they fix it. Recommend legal review for high-value disputes.

Generate headlines for [content: article, newsletter, webpage, presentation]. The content: [summary or paste text]. The reader: [who and what they want]. The channel: [blog, email, LinkedIn, internal]. The promise: [what the content actually delivers].

Deliver 10 headlines by angle: 2 Factual (the subject, clearly stated), 2 Benefit-oriented (what the reader gains), 2 Question-based (a real question the reader has), 2 Data-driven (using only provided figures), 2 Contrarian (challenging a common belief). For each headline: a matching first sentence that flows naturally.

Constraints: 60 chars max per headline if for web ([yes/no]), zero clickbait that fails to deliver, no forced puns. Recommend ONE headline based on the channel/reader with a 2-line justification.

Before I draft [document: report, article, memo, file], build a detailed outline. Topic: [subject]. Reader: [who, what they know, what they expect]. Goal: [what they should understand, believe, or do]. Available material: [facts, data, examples, sources]. Target length: [length].

Produce a three-level outline: Parts (with the message of each part as a full affirmative sentence, not a vague theme like 'Context'), Sub-parts, and for each sub-part, a list of planned paragraphs with the core idea of each and the material to use ([reference provided items]).

Constraints: The reader must be able to understand the full argument just by reading the Part messages; flag where material is missing (planned paragraph with no data) rather than inventing; suggest the order of parts based on the reader (e.g., conclusion first for busy execs). End with 3 questions to settle before drafting starts.

My document's conclusion is weak; help me rewrite it. Document: [type and subject]. Current text/ending: [paste at least the last section]. Reader: [who]. Desired action: [reply, approve, book a call, change a practice]. Deadline: [if any].

Rewrite the conclusion in three blocks: A value-add synthesis (connect the dots, don't just recap the TOC), a CTA with a verb, an owner, and a deadline ('Approve X by [date]' not 'it would be good to'), and a closing line that sticks (a concrete image or stake, not a platitude).

Constraints: 10 lines max, no new info not in the body, no 'in conclusion' or 'to wrap up', no poetic fluff. Provide 2 versions: one professional for internal use, one engaging for sales.

My text is fine section by section but feels choppy. Text: [paste text or the end/start of each part]. Document type: [report, article, presentation, webpage]. Reader: [who].

For each junction between two parts: Identify the actual logical relationship (consequence, opposition, scale shift, example-to-general, problem-to-solution), then write a transition in 1-2 sentences that closes the previous part and opens the next by making this logic explicit. If two parts have NO logical link, tell me: that's an outline problem, not a transition problem, and suggest a move to fix it.

Constraints: Ban filler connectors ('furthermore', 'it should be noted', 'regarding'), no transitions that recap everything prior, vary the mechanisms. Deliver in a table: Junction, Logical Relationship, Proposed Transition.

Transform this real case into a narrative for [usage: webpage, sales deck, LinkedIn, internal newsletter]. Facts: [who was the client/team, what was the problem, what was done, what happened, with real data]. Key takeaway: [message]. Confidentiality: [name the client or anonymize].

Write the story in four acts: The initial situation with a concrete detail to make it real, the obstacle and its cost (the 'stuck' moment), the action taken told through people's choices (who decided what, not 'a solution was deployed'), and the result with provided data and daily impact.

Constraints: 250 words max, no invented data or details (mark [to be completed] if missing), no fake suspense, the client/team is the hero (not us), clean anonymization if requested (sector/size instead of name). Also provide a 3-sentence version for a hook.

Explain [technical topic, e.g., a mechanism, tech, regulation, internal process] to [non-specialist audience, e.g., clients, board, new hires]. Material: [paste documentation or technical notes]. Why they need this: [the decision or action depending on their understanding]. Target length: [length].

Draft the explanation: Start with what they know (a lived situation or familiar object), use a consistent analogy if it helps (drop it as soon as it distorts, and say so), explain the mechanism step-by-step in everyday words, and state what it concretely changes for the reader.

Constraints: No technical terms without a one-sentence definition, 20-word max sentences, no condescending tone ('to put it simply'). End with an honest list of simplifications: what the plain version glosses over compared to technical reality, so I can ensure it isn't misleading.

Write [format: a narrative profile or a Q&A interview] of [person: role, tenure] for [channel: internal newsletter, careers site, team page, LinkedIn]. Material: [paste transcript, notes, or written answers]. Goal: [e.g., humanize a role, attract candidates, showcase expertise]. Channel tone: [e.g., professional, warm, corporate].

For a profile: A hook based on a real detail from the transcript, a brief career path, daily life in the role with concrete scenarios, well-chosen direct quotes per section, and a forward-looking closing. For an interview: 5-7 rephrased questions for liveliness, with tightened answers WITHOUT changing meaning or the person's natural voice.

Constraints: 400 words max, do not attribute anything not in the material, flag cut passages that might need their review. Remind me at the end that the person must approve the text before publication.

Write a note for [colleague's name, role, tenure] who is leaving. Reason: [e.g., retirement, new job, internal move, end of contract]. My relationship: [manager, close colleague, distant colleague]. Real memories/facts: [anecdotes, shared projects, appreciated traits]. Format: [farewell speech, group card, team message]. Tone: [e.g., professional, light humor, heartfelt].

Draft the text: Open with a specific memory rather than generalities, state what they actually contributed (2 concrete examples from my material), mention a personality trait illustrated by a kind (never embarrassing) anecdote, and offer well-wishes for their next step.

Constraints: For a speech, 2 mins max spoken (~250 words), natural phrasing; for a card, 80 words max. No invented anecdotes, no jokes about appearance, age, or the reasons for leaving, no fake sentimentality.

Write our professional [Year] wishes for [Company]. Recipients: [segments: clients, partners, team, vendors]. What actually happened this year with each: [highlights: projects, challenges, news]. Next year's outlook: [shareable perspectives]. Channel: [email, printed card, LinkedIn, team speech]. Sign-off: [who signs].

Deliver one version per segment. Each version: An opening that avoids 'on behalf of the whole team', a sincere recap of a moment shared WITH that recipient (from my material), the wishes linked to their specific goals, a sentence on what we will build together next year, and the sign-off.

Constraints: 100 words max per version, no interchangeable templates, no list of internal wins (the wishes are about the recipient, not us), no quantified promises. Also provide a 25-word version for a card or post.

Proofread the following text for [usage: client email, web post, official doc]. Text: [paste text]. Level of intervention: [corrections only, or corrections plus style suggestions]. Specific watch-outs: [e.g., proper names to leave alone, house terminology].

Work in three passes and deliver them separately. 1. Objective corrections: spelling, grammar, punctuation, and typography (US or UK standards as appropriate), in a table: error, correction, one-line rule. 2. Proposed style improvements: repetitions, clunky phrasing, ambiguity, each with a justification for me to accept/reject. 3. Final clean text with all objective corrections applied.

Constraints: NEVER change meaning, data, names, or quotes; ask if intent is unclear; flag grammatically correct but ambiguous sentences.

This document was written by multiple people and it shows. Document: [paste text]. Type/Usage: [report, sales proposal, documentation, file]. Target style: [reference section or describe: e.g., professional, direct, technical].

Work in two steps. 1. Inconsistency diagnostic table: Terminology (same thing named differently), conventions (acronyms, numbers vs. words, dates, units, capitalization), tone (narrative vs. bulleted), person/tense (we/active/passive, present/past), and formatting (lists/titles). 2. The rewritten, harmonized document based on the target style, keeping all content, data, and structure intact.

Constraints: List the harmonization choices you made (which term won, which convention) for my approval; flag actual content contradictions between sections (different data for the same thing) without fixing them: authors must decide.

This text was produced or co-written with AI and it feels like it. Rewrite it to sound like a natural professional voice. Text: [paste text]. Usage: [where it will be published]. My voice: [2 or 3 sentences written by me for tone calibration, if available].

Track and eliminate: Pompous openings ('In today's fast-paced world', 'At the digital age'), mechanical structures (systematic triads, 'Not only X, but Y', cascading rhetorical questions), pet words ('crucial', 'essential', 'revolutionize', 'optimal', 'delve into', 'landscape'), hollow conclusions ('In conclusion, it is clear that'), bullet points that add nothing over a sentence, uniform enthusiasm, and general claims without concrete examples.

Output: The rewritten text, plus a table of found quirks (original passage, problem, rewrite). Constraints: Keep all info and the expected language level, shortening is encouraged, do not replace one quirk with another.

Shorten this text to [length: words, characters, or lines]. Current text: [paste text with length if known]. Why this limit: [e.g., form field, RFP limit, executive summary, print space, platform character limit]. Unchangeable items: [e.g., data, mandatory legal mentions, names].

Method: First, delete without loss (redundancies, filler, adverbs, details the reader won't use). Second, condense (merge sentences, use direct phrasing). Third, only as a last resort, sacrifice content, starting with the least useful to the target reader.

Output: The text at the exact length (with count), plus a log of cuts in three categories (deleted without loss, condensed, sacrificed) with a one-line explanation for each sacrifice. If the limit makes the text misleading or inaccurate, tell me instead of delivering a false text.

Check the INTERNAL consistency of this document before release (do not verify against outside sources: only what the text says vs. itself). Document: [paste text]. Type: [report, proposal, audit]. Sensitive areas: [what must be reliable: amounts, dates, names].

Systematically check: Data (totals that don't add up, incompatible percentages, same amount written differently), Dates (impossible chronology, inconsistent lead times, deadlines already passed by the [planned send date]), Names/Titles (same entity with multiple names, undefined acronyms), Claims (one section promising what another excludes, conclusion not supported by body), and Cross-references (cited appendices or sections that don't exist).

Output: A report table: Location (short quote), Issue found, Severity (blocker/to fix/minor), Proposed fix when obvious. Do not fix the text yourself: some gaps may be intentional, I will decide.

Repurpose the following content into short formats. Source content: [paste text or core message]. Recipient: [who]. Desired action: [what they should do]. Formats needed: [e.g., Email subject (50 chars), Pro SMS (160 chars), App notification (80 chars), Short description (200 chars), One-line dashboard summary].

For each format, provide 3 variants with character counts, matching the format's intent: The email subject drives opens without lying, the SMS is immediately actionable (who, what, link/contact), the notification gets straight to the point, the short description uses keywords the reader would search for.

Constraints: Never exceed the format limit, no 'text speak' abbreviations in a professional setting, no all-caps, lead with the essential info (short formats are truncated at the end). Flag what each format sacrifices from the source message.

Rephrase the following text to be inclusive and neutral without being clunky. Text: [paste text, e.g., job ad, internal comms, careers page]. Context: [usage]. House style: [e.g., preference for gender-neutral terms, specific local standards].

Apply techniques in this order: Epicene words and encompassing terms ('the team', 'the candidate', 'the person managing' rather than 'he/she'), rephrasing by verb or function ('you will lead' rather than 'the leader'), and only using doublets if natural. For job ads: ensure the title and body follow standard non-discrimination practices (e.g., using 'M/F/D' or similar local conventions).

Output: The rephrased text, plus a table of changes (original, rephrased, technique used). Constraints: Readability is priority (a clunky sentence is a bad solution), meaning strictly preserved, no political overreach or dumbing down of the text.

Build a glossary for [scope: a specific document, project, or company department]. Material: [paste text or list identified terms]. Readers: [who will use it, e.g., new hires, clients, partners]. House terms: [internal jargon, acronyms, product names to include].

For each term: The term (with variants/acronyms in parentheses), a one-sentence definition understandable by the target reader (not a dictionary definition), a real-world usage example from the provided material where possible, and cross-references ('see also') to related terms. Mark which terms are industry standard vs. purely internal.

Constraints: Alphabetical order, one sentence per definition (two max), no defining a term using another undefined term, no circularity. Extract terms from the material that I didn't list but a layperson would struggle with, and flag terms used with two different meanings in the document.