Prompts for real work, written the way a team should save them.

Summarise this email thread for me as the person who has just been copied in. Give me: the decision being asked for, who is waiting on whom, any dates or deadlines mentioned, and the one thing I need to do. Keep it under 120 words. Then draft a two-sentence reply that confirms what I will do and by when, in a plain, warm tone, ready for me to edit.

From this meeting, list every action that was agreed as a table with three columns: owner, action in their own words, and the date or trigger mentioned. Mark any action where no owner was named. Below the table, list the decisions made in one line each, and any open questions raised but not resolved. Do not add actions that were only discussed as possibilities.

Using the attached [template] for structure and headings, and the attached [notes] for content, write a first draft of the [document type]. Keep every heading from the template. Where the notes do not cover a heading, write [GAP: what is missing] rather than inventing content. Short paragraphs, UK English, no exclamation marks, numbers with units. Flag any figure taken from the notes with [CHECK].

Read the attached [document type]. Do not summarise it. Give me the ten questions a careful [role] should ask before agreeing to it, in order of how much money or risk each carries. For each, quote the clause or page it comes from so I can check it, and say in one line why it matters. Then list anything you expected to find and did not.

Rewrite the text below for a reader who is [role] and has five minutes. Keep every fact, figure and date exactly as written. Remove repetition, hedging and jargon. Use short paragraphs and, where there are more than three items, a list. Target length: [number] words. At the end, list anything you removed that the reader might still need, so I can decide.

[Paste text]

I need to have a conversation with [role] about [the issue, two sentences, no names]. My aim is [what a good outcome looks like]. Their likely position is [what you expect them to say]. Give me: the three points I must land, in order; the two objections most likely to come back and a calm response to each; and a one-sentence opening that is direct without being hostile. Then tell me the one thing I should not say. Under 250 words.

Read the attached invitation to tender. Extract every requirement, mandatory or scored, into a table with columns: reference (section and page), requirement in the buyer’s exact words, type (mandatory, scored, informational), word or page limit if stated, and evidence they ask for. Do not merge requirements. After the table, list the submission deadline, clarification deadline, format rules and where the scoring weights are stated.

Using my notes from the discovery call (attached) and our proposal template (attached), draft a proposal for [client type, e.g. a regional housing association]. In the "Your situation" section, use the client’s own phrases from the notes and do not add problems they did not raise. In "What we propose", map each element to a specific thing they said. Leave pricing as [PRICING]. Mark anything you inferred rather than read with [ASSUMPTION]. UK English, no superlatives about us.

Below are notes from [number] deals we did not win. Group the reasons given into no more than eight objections, in the buyer’s language, with a count for each. For every objection, write a two-sentence honest response we could give next time, and one question we should have asked earlier to surface it. Where the notes suggest we were simply the wrong fit, say so rather than inventing a rebuttal.

[Paste notes]

Using the attached campaign brief, build a four-week content plan as a table: week, channel, format, working title, the audience segment it is for (only segments named in the brief), the call to action, and owner as [OWNER]. Two to three pieces per week. Every piece must trace to an objective in the brief; note which. Do not invent audience segments, dates or claims about the product. Then list three questions the brief does not answer that would change the plan.

Here is our house style guide, followed by a draft. Check the draft against the guide only. List each departure as: the sentence, the rule it breaks, and a suggested fix that keeps the author’s meaning. Do not comment on anything the guide does not cover, and do not rewrite the whole piece. At the end, give a one-line verdict: ready, minor fixes, or rework.

STYLE GUIDE:
[Paste]

DRAFT:
[Paste]

We are writing a case study about our work with a [client type] on [what the work was, one sentence]. Write twelve interview questions for their [role] that will produce specific, quotable answers: what was happening before, what changed, what they can measure, what surprised them, what they would tell a peer. Avoid questions that invite adjectives about us. Order them so the easy factual ones come first. Add two follow-up probes for the question most likely to produce a number.

Write this week’s client update for [client] using the attached notes. Reader: their [role], who has five minutes. Three sections with these exact headings: What moved; What is blocked; What we need from you. Then one line on next week. Under 200 words. Plain UK English, no exclamation marks, no adjectives about our own work. Keep every number and date exactly; where the notes are unclear, write [CHECK] rather than guessing.

Below is a complaint from a client and my notes on what actually happened. Draft a reply from me ([role]) that: acknowledges the specific problem in their words; explains what happened in two sentences without blaming a colleague or a system; states exactly what we will do and by when; and offers one concrete way to reach me. No apology stacking, no "we take this very seriously", no marketing language. Under 180 words. Mark anything I need to confirm before sending with [CHECK].

COMPLAINT:
[Paste, with personal details removed]

WHAT HAPPENED:
[Paste]

Using the emails, meeting recaps and documents I have shared with you for [client], build a handover pack for a colleague taking over the account: who is who on the client side and what each cares about; open commitments we have made with dates; recurring rhythms (reports, meetings, invoicing); live issues and their history in three lines each; and the three things the new lead should do in week one. Cite the source document or thread for every commitment. Write [UNKNOWN] where the material does not say.

Using the attached management accounts (actual vs budget vs prior year), draft variance commentary for the board pack. Cover only lines where the variance is more than [threshold, e.g. 5% or £10k]. For each: the line, the variance in £ and %, and one or two sentences on the driver, using only reasons stated in the attached notes. Where no reason is given, write [DRIVER NEEDED]. Order by size of variance. Plain language, no adjectives, UK number formatting.

Explain what this worksheet does in plain English for someone who did not build it: what each column means, which cells are inputs and which are calculated, and what the main totals depend on. Then list anything that looks inconsistent: mixed formats, totals that do not match their ranges, hard-coded numbers where a formula would be expected. Do not change anything.

Compare the two attached supplier proposals. Build a table with rows for: total first-year cost, what is excluded, payment terms, annual uplift and how it is calculated, minimum term, notice period, exit costs, liability cap, data handling terms, and service levels with remedies. Quote the clause for each cell. Where a proposal is silent, write "not stated". Then list the three questions to put to each supplier before deciding. Do not recommend one.

Below are descriptions from three colleagues of how we currently [process, e.g. onboard a new supplier]. Write a single numbered procedure that reflects what they agree on. Where they disagree, stop and write [DECISION: option A / option B] with the trade-off in one line. Add a column for who does each step and what system it happens in. At the end, list steps that nobody mentioned but that a process like this normally needs, marked as suggestions.

[Paste the three descriptions]

From the chat log and notes below, write an incident summary for senior readers who were not involved: a timeline with times, impact on customers or colleagues in plain terms, what was done to resolve it, and the actions agreed to prevent recurrence with owners as roles. No names of individuals, no blame, no speculation about cause beyond what the notes state. Under 300 words. Mark gaps in the timeline with [GAP].

[Paste log and notes]

Using the old job description and the current post-holder’s notes on what the role involves now (both below), write a refreshed job description for [role]. Structure: purpose in two sentences; what you will do (six to nine bullets, each starting with a verb, drawn from the notes not the old JD); what you will bring (essential and desirable, kept short); how we work (from the notes). Plain, inclusive UK English, no jargon or superlatives. Do not add requirements that are not in either source. Mark anything that might be a legal or policy question with [HR CHECK].

Write a first-thirty-days plan for a new [role] joining a team of [number] in [function]. The role’s main responsibilities are [paste from JD]. The team’s rhythms are [meetings, reports, tools]. Structure by week: what they should learn, who they should meet (by role), what they should have done by Friday, and one question the manager asks at the end of the week. Keep it realistic for someone who is also learning the systems. Do not include HR paperwork; that is handled separately.

Read the attached board paper. Act as a sceptical non-executive director with a finance background. List the eight questions you would ask, in the order you would ask them, each with the paragraph it arises from. Then identify: any claim without a source or number; any risk mentioned without a mitigation; and any recommendation whose cost is not stated. Do not rewrite the paper.

Draft a ninety-day plan for introducing [assistant] to our [team, number of people] at a [organisation type]. Their week is mostly [describe]. Structure: weeks 1 to 2 (readiness and the one-page guardrails), weeks 3 to 4 (hands-on session and the first workflows), weeks 5 to 8 (library, champion, second cohort if any), weeks 9 to 12 (review against three numbers: minutes saved per person per week, workflows still in use, people who used the tool for real work this week). Name the decision the leadership team makes at day ninety. Keep to one page. Mark anything that depends on IT or legal with [CHECK].

Using the attached strategy slides, write a narrative version of about 600 words for all staff. Start with what is changing and why, in plain language. Then the three priorities, each with one sentence on what it means for a typical team member’s week. End with what will be different in a year, stated as things people could observe, and what we are asking people to do now. No jargon, no corporate phrases, no exclamation marks. Where the slides assert something without support, write [SUPPORT NEEDED].