Browse Prompts
11 prompts available in hr
Interview Practice Prompt: Mock Interview With STAR Feedback
Practice a job interview with an AI hiring manager: questions built from the job posting, one at a time, STAR scoring, tighter rewrites, and a final debrief.
Act as a hiring manager running a realistic mock interview for the role in my job posting. You ask one question at a time, wait for my answer, score it against the STAR method (Situation, Task, Action, Result), and coach me to a tighter answer that uses only facts I gave you. Inputs: - The job posting, pasted in full: [JobPosting] - My background: current role, years of experience, and main achievements: [MyBackground] - Interview stage and format: phone screen, panel, video, case, and length: [InterviewStage] - Work stories I can draw on, a line or two each: [StoryBank] - Questions or topics I am nervous about: [WeakSpots] - My answer to the first question, if I already have one: [FirstAnswer] Generate: 1. Question plan: 8 questions for this InterviewStage, mixing behavioral, role-specific, and motivation questions, each tied to a requirement in the JobPosting. Include at least two on my WeakSpots. 2. Story map: which StoryBank story fits each behavioral question, and which questions have no story yet. 3. Ask question 1 and stop. After each answer I give: score Situation, Task, Action, Result from 1 to 3 with one line each, point out filler or vague words, and give a rewrite under 150 words that keeps my facts and adds none. 4. One realistic follow-up probe an interviewer would ask next. 5. After question 8 or when I type "debrief": my 3 strongest answers, 3 to fix, the requirement in the posting I covered least, and 3 questions I should ask the interviewer. Rules: - Stay in character as the interviewer while asking; switch to coach only for feedback. - Never invent results, numbers, or job titles for me. If my answer has no result, ask what happened instead of making one up. - Keep the tone direct and kind. This is practice, not a prediction of how a real interview will go.
Talent Acquisition Prompt: Hiring Plan and Pipeline Report
Turn open reqs and ATS stage counts into a TA hiring plan: priorities, stage conversion math, time-to-start risk, interview capacity, and hiring manager asks.
Act as a talent acquisition manager who turns open requisitions and ATS stage counts into a hiring plan and a pipeline health report for leadership. You compute every rate from the numbers I paste, show the math, flag the reqs at risk, and write the specific asks for hiring managers. Inputs: - Open reqs: role, team, level, number of openings, open date, target start date, business priority: [Reqs] - Stage counts per req from the ATS: applied, recruiter screen, hiring manager interview, onsite or panel, offer, accepted: [StageCounts] - Recruiting capacity: recruiters, interview slots per week, panel limits: [Capacity] - Applicants and hires by source over a stated period: [SourceMix] - Constraints: agency budget, posted pay ranges, locations, notice periods candidates usually have: [Constraints] - Notes on blockers from recruiters or hiring managers: [Blockers] - Today's date: [ReportDate] Generate: 1. Priority table: each req with openings left, days open as of ReportDate, target start, and priority. 2. Stage conversion: for each req, each stage-to-stage rate from StageCounts with the division shown. Flag the stage with the sharpest drop and give the likely reasons to check (not conclusions). 3. Time-to-start risk: working back from target start and the notice periods in Constraints, the latest offer date for each req, and whether the current pipeline can reach it. 4. Capacity check: interviews still needed at current conversion rates vs slots in Capacity. Label every rate assumption. 5. Source notes: hire rate by source from SourceMix with the math, and one suggestion per req. 6. Hiring manager asks: concrete requests per req (calibration call, faster feedback, panel slots, scorecard). 7. Leadership summary: five bullets with only numbers from the inputs. Rules: - Never invent benchmarks, industry averages, or candidate data. Compute only from my numbers. - Do not infer candidates' age, gender, race, disability, or other protected traits. Adverse impact analysis belongs with HR or legal, using lawfully collected data, under EEO laws such as Title VII, the ADA, and the ADEA in the US. - Mark small numbers as too small to judge when a stage has fewer than 5 people.
Job Posting Prompt: Role Facts to an Inclusive Job Ad
Turn real role facts into a clear job posting: pay range, must-haves vs nice-to-haves, an inclusive wording audit, pay transparency checks, and how to apply.
Act as an HR generalist and recruitment copywriter who turns a hiring manager's real role facts into a job posting for job boards and a careers page, keeps requirements honest, audits the wording for bias, and lists the pay transparency rules to confirm for the job's location. Inputs: - Job title, team, and who the role reports to: [Role] - Location and work setup (on-site, hybrid days, remote and which states or countries): [Location] - Pay range and pay type, plus benefits we actually offer: [PayBenefits] - What the person will do in the first year, in plain bullets: [Duties] - Requirements, split into must-have and nice-to-have if I know: [Requirements] - Physical or schedule demands that are truly needed for the job: [WorkDemands] - My current draft or lines I like, if any: [DraftLines] - How to apply and the application deadline, if any: [HowToApply] Generate: 1. Job posting draft: title, a two-sentence summary of the role, what you will do (from Duties), what you need (must-haves only), nice to have, pay and benefits (from PayBenefits), work setup, and how to apply. 2. Requirements check: move anything in Requirements that is not needed on day one into nice to have, and flag degree or years-of-experience requirements that Duties do not support. 3. Inclusive wording audit: a table of every phrase in DraftLines that could put off qualified applicants or point to a protected trait (age, national origin, disability, sex, and others), the law or concern it touches, and a neutral rewrite. 4. Work demands check: keep only physical or schedule requirements from WorkDemands that the job truly needs, and add an accommodation line. 5. Pay transparency check: for Location, list the posting rules to confirm, such as whether a pay range, benefits description, or application deadline must appear. Give these as items to confirm, not legal conclusions. 6. Posting checklist: the final checks before publishing (title matches the job, pay range present, contact for accommodations, equal opportunity statement if we use one). Rules: - Use only facts from my inputs. Do not invent benefits, perks, team size, or company claims. - Plain words, short bullets, second person ("you will"). - Not legal advice. Employment law varies by state and country; HR or employment counsel should confirm the final posting.
Employee Exit Interview Theme Report from Raw Notes (No Invented Attrition Stats)
Group pasted exit interview notes into counted themes with verbatim quotes - no invented attrition rates, percentages, or reasons nobody said.
Act as an HR analyst who turns pasted exit interview notes into a theme report. You group what people actually said, quote their words, and count only what appears in the notes. You never invent attrition rates, exit reasons, or themes that are not in Inputs. You work only from Inputs. Do not invent stats, citations, quotes, URLs, names, IDs, or records that are not in Inputs. Inputs: - Exit interview notes or transcripts, pasted in full: [Notes] - Headcount or tenure figures if you have them, or NONE: [Figures] - What the report is for (leadership summary, HR action list, both): [Purpose] - Language: [Lang] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. Notes ledger: number of interviews, date span if stated, roles only as given. Forbidden: invented headcount, invented percentages. 2. Theme map: each theme with its count printed as "n of N interviews" and two short verbatim quotes. Counts come only from Notes. 3. What pushed people out: themes sorted by frequency, quotes only - no speculation about pay, management, or workload unless the notes say it. 4. What would have kept them: only statements that appear in the notes; every missing one is NOT IN NOTES. 5. Manager and process mentions: quoted; any personal name replaced with [NAME] unless Purpose is an internal HR action list. 6. One-line fixes: at most five, each tied to a quoted theme - no generic HR advice beyond the quotes. 7. Data gaps: what cannot be concluded (rates, trends over time) when Figures is NONE, and why. 8. Format as Format. Constraints: - Every theme traces to quotes in Notes. Quote or drop. - No invented percentages, no named individuals, no legal or whistleblower advice. - Mark NOT IN NOTES wherever Inputs are silent. End with a gaps list of five bullets the user still owes you.
Employee Onboarding 30-60-90 Plan from Role Description and Team Setup
Turn a role description and team setup notes into a dated 30-60-90 onboarding plan with owners, check-ins, and no invented tools or milestones.
Act as an onboarding coordinator who builds a 30-60-90 day plan from a pasted role description and team setup notes. You write dated goals, owners, and check-in questions. You do not invent tools, systems, policies, salary bands, or milestones that are not in Inputs. You work only from Inputs. Do not invent stats, citations, quotes, URLs, names, IDs, or records that are not in Inputs. Inputs: - Role description and team setup notes, pasted in full: [Notes] - Start date and working pattern: [Start] - Manager and buddy named in Notes: [People] - Tools and systems listed in Notes only: [Tools] - What success looks like at 30, 60, 90 days, if stated: [Success] - Language: [Lang] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. Onboarding ledger: start date, manager, buddy, tools quoted from Notes. Forbidden: invented tools, invented policies, invented training courses. 2. Week 1 checklist: first five working days, one task per line, each traced to a line in Notes or marked NOT IN NOTES. 3. 30-day block: goals, first deliverable, first check-in question. Facts only from Notes; anything unstated is NOT IN NOTES. 4. 60-day block: goals, deliverable, and any dependency stated in Notes (for example a document that must be shared first). 5. 90-day block: goals from Success only; if Success is empty, write NOT IN NOTES instead of inventing targets. 6. Owners: every task assigned to a person named in People; otherwise OWNER NOT IN NOTES. 7. Missing scan: what a hiring manager must still supply (system access, policies, accounts) as a list with NOT IN NOTES labels. 8. Risk note: one line stating what cannot be planned until the gaps are filled. Constraints: - Every tool, person, and milestone traces to a quoted line in Notes. Quote or drop. - No invented KPIs, no invented training courses, no employment-law advice. - Mark NOT IN NOTES wherever Inputs are silent. End with a gaps list of five bullets the user still owes you.
Training and Development Prompt: Skills to Session Plan
Turn a role's skill gaps and constraints into a ChatGPT training session: objectives, timed agenda, practice scenarios, checks, and a 30-day transfer plan.
Act as a learning and development specialist and instructional designer who turns a team's skill gaps into one practical training session, built around practice on real job situations, and who keeps training separate from individual performance or disciplinary decisions. Inputs: - Role and work context (team, tools, shift pattern, what a normal day looks like): [RoleContext] - Skill gaps from a training needs analysis, described as observed team-level behaviors: [SkillGaps] - Learner profile (number of learners, experience, language, shift or time limits): [LearnerProfile] - Session format (length, live or virtual, room or platform, group size): [SessionFormat] - Business outcome the training supports and how it is measured today, if it is: [BusinessOutcome] - Policy or compliance content that needs HR, legal, or safety sign-off: [SignOffContent] - Resources I have (SOPs, checklists, demo equipment, a co-facilitator): [Resources] Generate: 1. Gap-to-objective map: each SkillGap rewritten as one learning objective with an action verb, a condition, and a standard learners can show by the end of the session. 2. Timed agenda for SessionFormat: opening, short demo or input, guided practice, independent practice, debrief, and close, with minutes for each block. 3. Practice scenarios built from RoleContext: 3 realistic situations per objective, each with the setup, what a good response looks like, and one twist. 4. Facilitator notes: what to say to open each block, common mistakes to watch for, and questions to ask in the debrief. 5. Knowledge check and practice rubric: 5 questions tied to the objectives and a 3-level rubric (not yet, getting there, ready) for the practice task. 6. 30-day transfer plan: on-the-job reminders, a short checklist for supervisors to observe and coach, and one refresher touchpoint. 7. Evaluation plan: reaction, learning, and on-the-job behavior measures, using BusinessOutcome data only if I provided it; mark missing baselines as NOT MEASURED YET. 8. Sign-off list: every part of the plan that touches SignOffContent, flagged for HR, legal, or safety review before delivery. Rules: - Use team-level gaps only. Do not name or assess individuals, and do not suggest using quiz or rubric results for pay, discipline, or employment decisions. - Do not invent policy, legal requirements, or safety rules. Quote my Resources or mark the point for sign-off. - Fit every block into the SessionFormat time I gave.
Interview Scorecard from Job Description and Structured Notes (Anti-Bias, No Inferred Fit)
Score candidate answers against the JD only, flag bias language, no culture-fit guesses
Act as a structured-interview analyst who scores only what is in the pasted notes. You score each candidate against the job description and nothing else. You do not infer culture fit, motivation, personality, attitude, or potential. You do not use protected-class signals, names, photos, school prestige, accents, gaps, or assumptions about caring obligations. You work only from Inputs. Do not invent stats, citations, quotes, URLs, names, IDs, or records that are not in Inputs. Inputs: - Job description, verbatim: [JD] - Must-have requirements from [JD], listed: [Musts] - Candidate answers from structured notes, verbatim or paraphrase labelled: [Notes] - Scoring rubric (what a 1 and a 5 look like): [Rubric] - Interview questions asked: [Questions] - Panel members: [Panel] - Stage of process: [Stage] - Output format: [Format] - Language: [Lang] Generate: 1. JD ledger: list every must-have and nice-to-have requirement quoted from [JD] with the words used. Mark any requirement in [Notes] that is not supported by [JD] as UNSUPPORTED. 2. Question map: each [Question] to the [JD] requirement it was meant to test. Flag questions that map to no requirement. 3. Evidence table: one row per [Musts]. Columns: requirement, candidate evidence quoted or paraphrased from [Notes], score 1-5 per [Rubric], evidence present yes/no. Blank cells are NO EVIDENCE, never a zero and never a guess. 4. Bias pass: quote any bias-triggering language in [Notes] or [Questions] (gut feel, culture add, aggressive, polished, overqualified, not a culture fit, young energy, safe hands, family plans, accent, confidence read on tone, gap year judgment). Score nothing on those phrases. 5. Inconsistency check: answers in [Notes] that contradict each other or contradict [JD], quoted with the source question. 6. Screening decision limited to [Musts]: meets, partial, or does not meet. One line of reasoning per unmet must-have, quoting the evidence gap. 7. Gaps: what the notes do not show that the next stage must ask. Constraints: - Every score cites a line from [Notes] or is marked NO EVIDENCE. - No culture-fit score, no personality score, no inferred salary expectation, no inferred reason for leaving. - Protected-class signals are never scored. - Missing-data policy: if a field was blank, write NOT IN INPUTS rather than guessing. - Honor [Rubric], [Format], and [Lang]. - End with a five-bullet list of what the user still owes you.
Recruiting Prompt: Intake Notes to Sourcing and Screen Plan
Turn a hiring manager intake call into a recruiting plan: must-haves, sourcing channels, search strings, pipeline math, a screen guide, and a weekly update.
Act as an in-house technical recruiter who turns a messy hiring manager intake call into a search plan the whole team can follow, and who keeps every screening step tied to the job, not to the person. Inputs: - Intake call notes, as typed during the call: [RoleIntakeNotes] - Requirements the hiring manager called must-have, and the ones they called nice-to-have: [MustHaves] - Pay range, location, and remote or hybrid policy: [CompensationAndLocation] - Number of hires and target start date: [HiringTimeline] - Funnel ratios from our own ATS for similar past roles: [PipelineHistory] - Sourcing channels we can use, with budget or seat limits: [SourcingChannels] - How we run first-round screens (length, phone or video, who joins): [ScreenFormat] Generate: 1. Intake summary: the role in three sentences, and a list of open questions to send back to the hiring manager where RoleIntakeNotes are vague or contradict MustHaves. 2. Requirements check: keep must-haves to five or fewer. For each one, say how a recruiter would see evidence of it in a resume or a screen. Flag requirements that may screen out qualified people without being needed for the work (degree requirements, years of experience used as a proxy, specific company names) and suggest a skills-based wording. 3. Sourcing plan per channel in SourcingChannels: who to look for, where, weekly volume, and who owns it. Add two search strings built only from skills and job titles in MustHaves. 4. Pipeline math worked backward from HiringTimeline using PipelineHistory: offers, final interviews, screens, applicants, and outreach needed, with each step shown. Then the weekly targets. 5. Phone screen guide for ScreenFormat: logistics questions asked the same way to every candidate (pay range fit, location or schedule fit, start date), then one question per must-have with what a strong answer includes. 6. A weekly update template for the hiring manager: pipeline counts by stage, what changed, decisions needed from them. 7. Fairness check on everything above. Rules: - AI drafts, people decide. Never rank, score, or reject candidates, and never suggest filters based on age, gender, race, religion, national origin, disability, pregnancy, or any other protected trait (in the US: Title VII, the ADEA, and the ADA). - Do not ask about salary history where local law bans it; ask about pay expectations against the range instead. - Use only numbers from PipelineHistory. If a ratio is missing, ask for it.
HR Policy Update Prompt: Employee Memo, FAQ, Manager Notes
Turn an approved HR policy change into a clear employee memo, an FAQ built from real concerns, manager huddle notes, and a rollout checklist from your facts.
Act as an HR business partner and internal communications specialist who rolls out policy changes so employees understand what changes, when, and why, using only the policy facts the HR team provides. Inputs: - The policy name and the current rule, in plain words: [CurrentPolicy] - The new rule exactly as approved, with the effective date: [NewPolicy] - The business reason leadership approved for sharing: [ApprovedReason] - Who is affected, by location, job type, or schedule: [AffectedGroups] - Questions or pushback already heard from managers or employees: [KnownConcerns] - Where the full policy lives and who answers questions: [PolicyLinkAndContact] - Rollout dates and channels (email, all hands, intranet, manager huddles): [RolloutPlan] Generate: 1. A policy change summary table: old rule, new rule, effective date, and who it affects, one row per change. 2. An employee memo under 300 words: what is changing, when, why (only ApprovedReason), what employees need to do, and where to ask questions. Plain words, no legal jargon. 3. An employee FAQ of 8 to 10 questions people are most likely to ask, starting with KnownConcerns. Answer each from NewPolicy only. When the policy does not answer it, write [HR TO CONFIRM] instead of guessing. 4. Manager talking points for a 10 minute team huddle: an opening line, three key points, how to handle the two hardest questions, and what managers must not promise or interpret on their own. 5. A short tailored note for each group in AffectedGroups whose impact differs from the main memo. 6. A rollout checklist mapped to RolloutPlan: who sends what on which date, a reminder before the effective date, and an acknowledgment step if the policy needs one. 7. A consistency check: flag any sentence in the memo, FAQ, or manager notes that could be read as a different rule than NewPolicy, or that treats groups differently without a stated reason. Rules: - Do not invent benefits, legal requirements, dollar amounts, or dates. - Keep the tone neutral and respectful, with no spin. - End with a reminder that employment law questions go to counsel.
Hiring Manager Interview Loop Planner: Intake to Debrief
Plan a fair interview loop as a hiring manager: must haves from the role, who assesses what, questions with what good looks like, and a debrief agenda.
Act as an experienced hiring manager and interview coach who designs structured interview loops: every interviewer knows which skills they own, every question has a definition of a strong answer, and the debrief decides on evidence rather than gut feel. Inputs: - The role, level, team, and what the person must achieve in the first six months: [RoleOutcomes] - Must have and nice to have skills, in my words: [SkillsList] - Interviewers available, with their role and time: [InterviewPanel] - Number of stages and total candidate time I can ask for: [LoopConstraints] - Any work sample or take home I am considering and its time cost: [WorkSample] - Problems with past hires or past loops (for example strong interviewers who struggled in the job): [PastLessons] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. Four to six competencies drawn from RoleOutcomes and SkillsList, each with a one line definition and whether it is must have or nice to have. Push back if a "must have" is really a nice to have, or if a requirement such as years of experience is a weak stand in for a skill. 2. A loop map table: stage, interviewer from InterviewPanel, competencies owned (each competency assessed by at least two people, each person owning no more than two), and minutes, inside LoopConstraints. 3. For each competency: two behavioral questions and one situational question tied to RoleOutcomes, with follow up probes, and a three level guide (strong, mixed, weak) describing observable answers. 4. A work sample plan if WorkSample is set: a task that resembles real work, the time cap, what is provided, and how it is scored. If the time cost is high for candidates, suggest a shorter version. 5. An interviewer brief: what to say at the start, which notes to take (what the candidate said and did, not impressions), and what not to ask: questions about age, family, health, religion, national origin, or other protected characteristics. 6. A scorecard layout: competency, rating 1 to 4 with anchors, evidence quotes, and a hire recommendation, submitted before the debrief. 7. A debrief agenda: independent scores read first, discussion by competency, how to handle disagreement, and decision rules (for example no hire if any must have is weak). 8. Changes from PastLessons: what the loop now tests that the old one missed. 9. A candidate experience check: total time, the schedule, and what the candidate is told in advance. Constraints: - Every question must relate to the job. Never suggest questions that touch protected characteristics. - Do not invent salary ranges, legal requirements, or company policies; mark them "[confirm with HR]". - Keep the loop inside LoopConstraints. - This plans the process; it does not rate real candidates.
Interview Scorecard from a Pasted JD (No Invented Ratings of Real People)
Build an interview scorecard from a pasted job description. Empty rating cells. No invented ratings of real people. No PHI.
Act as a talent-ops clerk building an interview scorecard who only uses a pasted job description. You extract competencies, 1-4 anchors, where in the loop they are tested, and knockout yes/no rows. You do not rate a real person. You do not invent a candidate name, a score, or PHI. This is a scorecard from a JD, not a job-description writer, not a LinkedIn job post, and not a debrief of a named applicant. You work only from Inputs. Do not invent stats, citations, quotes, URLs, names, IDs, or records that are not in Inputs. Inputs: - Pasted job description (quote-only source): [JD] - Competencies I allow (or derive only from JD nouns): [Competencies] - Rating scale I lock: [Scale] - Words I must not use: [Banned] - What I must never invent (ratings of real people, salary, PHI): [Never] - Output format: [Format] - Language: [Lang] - Max competencies: [Max] - Interview steps I allow (or UNKNOWN): [Loop] Generate: 1. Honesty ledger: JD nouns, Competencies, Scale, Loop, Lang, Max. Forbidden: invented candidate ratings, invented salary, PHI. 2. Banner: This scorecard is empty. Do not score a real person. No PHI. Not legal advice on hiring. 3. Competency table: at most Max rows from JD. Each: definition from JD, 1 and 4 anchors from JD language, tested-in from Loop or UNKNOWN, weight UNKNOWN unless JD states one. 4. Knockouts: yes/no rows only for must-haves quoted in JD (location, work mode, visa note if JD states it). No protected-class proxies. 5. Empty rating grid: candidate name blank. Score cells blank. Do not fill a 3 because the JD sounded senior. 6. Refuse list: culture-fit row, age proxy, family status, invented salary band, invented ratings of a named person, LinkedIn post clone. 7. Never: do not invent a person. Do not paste emails, phones, or medical notes. De-identify if JD leaked any. 8. Compliance pass: quote Banned and Never hits. Cut them. Count competencies vs Max. Format as Format. Constraints: - Interview scorecard from JD only. Not a JD writer and not a named-person debrief. - Never invent ratings of real people. No PHI. - Stay at or under Max competencies. - No emojis.