980+ Best Claude Prompts
Optimized for Claude 3.5 Sonnet

<instructions> You are an expert analyst specializing in [DOMAIN]. Analyze the provided document with surgical precision and intellectual rigor. Your analysis should be insightful, not just descriptive. </instructions> <context> Purpose of analysis: [WHY YOU NEED THIS ANALYSIS] Audience: [WHO WILL READ THIS] Prior knowledge level: [BEGINNER / INTERMEDIATE / EXPERT] </context> <document> [PASTE YOUR DOCUMENT HERE] </document> <output_format> Provide your analysis in this structure: 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (3 sentences — the most important things someone needs to know) 2. KEY FINDINGS (5-7 specific, concrete findings — not vague observations) 3. HIDDEN IMPLICATIONS (What's NOT said that matters? What should be read between the lines?) 4. CRITICAL GAPS (What important information is missing from this document?) 5. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS (3 specific, numbered next steps based on this analysis) 6. CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT (How confident are you in each finding? Why?) </output_format>

You are a research director with expertise in [FIELD]. I'm going to paste multiple research sources below. Your task is to synthesize them into a single, coherent analysis. <research_sources> SOURCE 1: [PASTE SOURCE 1] SOURCE 2: [PASTE SOURCE 2] SOURCE 3: [PASTE SOURCE 3] </research_sources> <synthesis_instructions> After reading all sources: 1. CONSENSUS VIEW: What do all (or most) sources agree on? 2. CONTRADICTIONS: Where do sources disagree? Which view has stronger evidence? 3. KNOWLEDGE GAPS: What important questions remain unanswered across all sources? 4. EMERGING PATTERNS: What trends or patterns appear across multiple sources? 5. MOST CREDIBLE CLAIMS: Which specific claims are best supported by evidence? 6. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: What should someone DO differently based on this research? 7. FURTHER READING: What specific topics should be researched next to fill the identified gaps? Approach this as a scientist, not a journalist. Challenge weak claims. Acknowledge uncertainty. Distinguish correlation from causation. Note where sample sizes or methodologies are weak. </synthesis_instructions>

<task> Analyze the writing style in the provided SAMPLE TEXT, then rewrite the CONTENT TO REWRITE in that exact style. </task> <sample_text> [PASTE 2-3 PARAGRAPHS THAT REPRESENT THE VOICE YOU WANT TO MATCH] </sample_text> <analysis_step> Before rewriting, analyze the sample text for: - Sentence length patterns (short punchy vs. long complex?) - Vocabulary level and specific word choices - Use of first/second/third person - Rhetorical devices (questions, lists, metaphors?) - Punctuation patterns - How ideas are sequenced - The overall "personality" this voice conveys </analysis_step> <content_to_rewrite> [PASTE THE CONTENT YOU WANT REWRITTEN IN THAT STYLE] </content_to_rewrite> First show me your voice analysis (3-4 bullet points), then provide the rewritten version. After the rewrite, note the 3 most significant style choices you made.

Explain the following code at three different comprehension levels. Do not simplify your explanation to the point of being inaccurate — be precise at every level. LEVEL 1 — EXECUTIVE (2-3 sentences): What does this code DO in plain business English? What problem does it solve? No technical jargon whatsoever. LEVEL 2 — DEVELOPER ONBOARDING (8-10 sentences): For a developer who knows programming concepts but is new to this codebase. Cover the logic flow, data structures used, and key design decisions. Include what you'd explain in a 5-minute code walkthrough. LEVEL 3 — EXPERT REVIEW (detailed): For a senior engineer who should quickly understand: the algorithm complexity, potential edge cases and failure modes, performance implications, security considerations if any, and whether the implementation follows best practices for this language/framework. Flag anything that looks wrong or could be improved. Code language: [LANGUAGE] ``` [PASTE CODE HERE] ```

<role> You are a senior software engineer with deep expertise in [LANGUAGE/FRAMEWORK]. You write clean, well-documented, production-ready code that your teammates can understand and maintain. </role> <task> Implement the following feature completely: [DETAILED FEATURE DESCRIPTION] </task> <requirements> - Language/framework: [LANGUAGE/FRAMEWORK] - Must integrate with: [EXISTING SYSTEM/API] - Performance requirements: [PERFORMANCE NEEDS] - Security requirements: [AUTH/SECURITY NEEDS] </requirements> <deliverables> Provide in this exact order: 1. APPROACH (2-3 sentences on your implementation strategy and key design decisions) 2. MAIN IMPLEMENTATION (complete, runnable code with inline comments for non-obvious logic) 3. UNIT TESTS (cover happy path, edge cases, and error conditions) 4. INTEGRATION NOTES (how to wire this into the existing system) 5. KNOWN LIMITATIONS (what this implementation doesn't handle and why) </deliverables> Existing codebase context: [PASTE RELEVANT EXISTING CODE OR DESCRIPTION]

<role> You are a decision analyst who helps executives make better choices by applying structured thinking and exposing cognitive biases. </role> <decision> I need to decide: [DESCRIBE YOUR DECISION] Options I'm considering: Option A: [OPTION A] Option B: [OPTION B] Option C: [OPTION C — or "Status quo" if staying the same is an option] </decision> <context> Relevant background: [YOUR SITUATION AND CONSTRAINTS] Timeframe: [WHEN DOES THIS NEED TO BE DECIDED] Key stakeholders: [WHO IS AFFECTED] Resources available: [BUDGET, TEAM, TIME] </context> <analysis_framework> Analyze this decision using: 1. CRITERIA MATRIX: List 5-7 decision criteria weighted by importance. Score each option against each criterion. 2. RISK ANALYSIS: For each option, identify the top 3 risks and estimate probability × impact. 3. REVERSIBILITY CHECK: How easy is it to reverse course if each option proves wrong? 4. COGNITIVE BIAS AUDIT: What biases might be influencing how I'm framing this decision? (List specific biases, not generic ones) 5. WHAT I MIGHT BE MISSING: What information would change my decision if I had it? 6. RECOMMENDATION: Which option would you choose and why? Be direct — don't hedge. 7. FIRST NEXT STEP: If I choose your recommended option, what's the single first thing I should do in the next 48 hours? </analysis_framework>