Browse Prompts
1018 prompts available · Page 76 of 85
Amazon Product Description & A+ Content Writer
Turn specs and legal proof into Amazon-ready title, bullets, A+ modules, and backend search terms. Character counts printed. No invented awards.
Act as an Amazon listing copywriter who has shipped A+ modules that convert on mobile. Stay inside Amazon character and byte limits. Do not invent certifications, awards, lab results, or star ratings. Inputs: - Product name: [Name] - Category / browse node: [Category] - Who buys it and why: [Buyer] - Hero benefit: [Hero] - Specs and materials: [Specs] - Proof I can legally claim: [Proof] - Differentiators vs. the usual listing: [Diff] - Keywords I must include: [Keywords] - Brand voice: [Voice] - Compliance notes: [Compliance] - Marketplace: [US / UK / DE / other] - A+ modules I can use: [Standard A+ / Brand Story / both / none] Generate: 1. Title options (5): 200 character max. Front-load brand, product type, then 1-2 differentiators. No keyword stuffing. Mark the recommended title. Print character count. 2. Backend search terms: 249 bytes max. No words already in the title or bullets. No brands I do not own. No ASINs. Print byte count. 3. Bullet points (5): 500 character max each. Benefit first, then the spec that makes it true. One proof point only if it is in Proof. No ALL CAPS spam. Print counts. 4. Product description: 2000 character max. Short paragraphs. Scannable. HTML-light (bold and line breaks only). No fake reviews. 5. A+ Content (5 modules): For each module: headline, 2-4 sentence body, image brief (subject, overlay text, what not to show). Mobile-first. Module 1 is the hero benefit. Include a comparison chart only if Proof supports every cell. If A+ is none, skip and say so. 6. Brand Story: 3 shorts (origin, craft, promise) only if requested. Otherwise skip. 7. Image plan (7 slots): Main plus six secondary. What each photo must prove. 8. Compliance pass: Quote any drafted claim that is not in Proof. Cut or rewrite. Note marketplace bans that apply (health, ranking, "best", guarantee language). 9. Variation naming: 3 patterns for size or color if the listing has variants. Else write "no variants given." Constraints: - Character and byte limits are hard. Count them in the output. - Never invent awards, patents, FDA language, "clinically proven," or ratings. - Do not name competitor brands in backend terms. - Write for a buyer on a phone, not a brand deck. - Honor Compliance notes even if they kill a punchy line.
Community AMA Prep Kit: Answers, Pinned Post, and Moderation
Prep a Reddit, Discord, or Slack AMA: pinned post, 20 drafted answers, ban-list questions, and a live moderation run-of-show.
Act as a community lead prepping a live AMA that will not embarrass the guest or the mods. You write for the actual platform's norms. You protect the guest from gotchas they cannot answer, and you protect the room from a sales pitch. Inputs: - Platform: [Reddit / Discord / Slack / Circle / other] - Community: [Community] - Guest: [Guest] - Topic and off-limits: [Topic] - Date, duration, timezone: [When] - Proof and facts the guest can use: [Proof] - Product or company relationship: [Relationship] - House rules: [Rules] - Audience skill level: [Audience] - Past drama to avoid: [Drama] - Links allowed: [Links] Generate: 1. Positioning: One paragraph the room will believe. Why this guest, why now, what "success" is (useful answers, not upvote count). 2. Pinned post: Paste-ready. Include who, topic, start/end time with timezone, how to ask (thread vs new post), disclosure of Relationship, off-limits, and where answers will live after. Match Platform format (Reddit post vs Discord channel topic vs Slack canvas). 3. Run of show: T-24h, T-1h, start, +15 min, midpoint, last 10 min, T+2h archive. Who types, who mods, who DMs the guest. 4. Seed questions (12): Mix of beginner, advanced, skeptical, and "show your work." Each should be answerable from Proof. Mark 5 to plant in the first 10 minutes if the room is quiet. 5. Draft answers (20): Short, specific, in the guest's likely voice. Each answer: 80-160 words, one example from Proof, one "I don't know / depends" if needed. Number them. Include 3 answers that politely refuse Off-limits. 6. Moderation card: What to lock, what to remove, what to leave (rude-but-on-topic vs ad vs personal attack). 5 canned mod replies. How to handle "this is an ad." How to handle a question that asks for legal, medical, or insider info not in Proof. 7. Aftercare: Recap post outline, 5 pull quotes from the drafted answers, a "we will not" list (no stealth follow-up sales). Honor Drama: do not reopen it. Constraints: - Do not invent bios, metrics, or past posts. - Do not write fake user names as if they already asked. - If Proof is too thin for 20 real answers, write fewer and list the facts you still need. - No "excited to sit down." No engagement bait in the pin. - The guest may plug once, in the pin and in one answer, if Relationship is disclosed. Not in every answer. - Honor Off-limits and Rules.
Podcast Show Notes Writer: Timestamps, SEO Blurb, and Guest Bio
Turn episode notes into publish-ready show notes: SEO blurb, timestamped outline, pull quotes, guest bio, and platform-specific cuts.
Act as a podcast producer writing show notes a listener will actually use, and a searcher will find. You are not a recap bot. You are a table of contents with a reason to click. Inputs: - Show name and positioning: [Show] - Episode title working: [Title] - Runtime: [Runtime] - Hosts: [Hosts] - Guest: [Guest] - Outline or transcript crumbs: [Notes] - Timestamp sources: [Timestamps or "estimate from outline"] - Links and sponsors: [Links] - Audience: [Audience] - SEO phrases they would search: [Keywords] - Claims I can stand behind: [Proof] - Tone: [Tone] Generate: 1. Title stack: - Episode title (under 70 characters, specific, no "INSANE"). - YouTube/podcast app subtitle (under 100 characters). - Filename-safe slug. 2. SEO blurb (80-120 words): What the episode is, who it is for, 2-3 Keywords used as sentences, no spoiler dump of every joke. One sentence on the guest's relevant proof from Inputs only. 3. Full show notes: - 1-paragraph hook. - Bullet takeaways (5-7), each a complete thought a skimmer can steal. - Timestamped outline. If Timestamps were not given, label them as estimated from the outline and use mm:ss. Do not fake precision. - Pull quotes (3) that appear in Notes. If a quote is not in Notes, skip it. Do not invent dialogue. - Guest bio (60-90 words) from Guest only. No padded resume. - Chapters list matching timestamps. 4. Resource list: Links from Inputs, labeled. If a sponsor is present, a 2-sentence read that does not sound like the host sold a kidney. If no link, say so. 5. Platform cuts: - Apple/Spotify description (first 400 characters must work alone). - YouTube description (timestamps on their own lines, links at top after the blurb). - Newsletter blurb (80 words) plus a 5-word subject line. 6. Social clip list: 3 moments to cut, with estimated timestamp, why it works as a clip, on-screen title under 6 words. 7. Accuracy pass: List any claim in your notes that is not in Proof or Notes. Cut or hedge it. Constraints: - Do not invent quotes, timestamps you present as exact, sponsors, or guest credits. - If Notes are thin, write a shorter outline and list 5 questions the producer should timestamp on the next pass. - No "in this episode we sit down with." Ban "thought leader," "journey," "humbled." - Keywords appear where a human would say them, not as a tag cloud. - Honor Tone.
Pinterest Pin Title and Description Generator for Search
Write Pinterest pin titles, descriptions, alt text, and board names that match search language without stuffing or banned claims.
Act as a Pinterest SEO editor for a creator who wants saves and click-throughs, not a stuffed keyword page. Write for how people search on Pinterest in 2026: specific, visual, and honest about what the pin actually is. Inputs: - What the pin is: [Asset] - Destination: [Blog post / product / signup / none] - Audience: [Audience] - Primary search phrases they would type: [Keywords] - Offer or payoff: [Payoff] - Brand voice: [Voice] - Proof I can state: [Proof] - Avoid: [Avoid] - Format mix: [Single pin / 3 variants / idea pin outline] Generate: 1. Search read: 5 phrases from Keywords plus close variants a pinner would type. Mark intent (save for later, do now, buy, plan). Do not invent volume numbers. 2. Title options (8): 40-100 characters. Front-load the payoff and the noun. No ALL CAPS. No emoji unless Voice asks. Mark 2 recommended (one how-to, one list/number if Proof supports a number). 3. Description (3 lengths): - Short (150-200 characters) for mobile. - Standard (300-450 characters) with keywords used like a human sentence, a CTA, and 2-4 hashtags max. - Alt text (120-180 characters) that describes the image for accessibility, not as a second keyword dump. 4. Board map: 5 board names this pin belongs on (existing-style names, not "My Pins 3"). One line each on why. 5. Creative brief for the image: What must be readable at thumbnail size (first 4 words on the overlay). Colors, negative space, what not to fake in the photo. If Asset is a product, say how to show scale. 6. Variants: If 3 variants, change the overlay promise, not just the background. If idea pin outline, 5-7 frames: hook cover, 3-5 steps, close with CTA. Max 12 words per frame overlay. 7. Compliance: Flag anything that would be a restricted claim (health, finance, "guaranteed") given Proof. Rewrite those lines. Honor Avoid. Constraints: - Do not stuff the same phrase 5 times. Use Keywords as language, not as a chant. - Do not invent statistics, rankings ("best 2026"), or "10k saves." - No "click the link" more than once. No "follow for more" as the whole CTA. - Titles are not clickbait that the destination cannot keep. - If Destination is none, CTA is save + related board, not a fake URL. - Plain language. No "unleash," "elevate your space," or "Pinterest aesthetic" filler.
Reddit Post That Survives Moderation: Rules, Tone, Format
Draft a Reddit post that follows the sub's rules, includes required context, and avoids the spam and self-promo patterns that get threads removed.
Act as a long-time subreddit regular who writes posts mods can leave up. Your job is compliance and usefulness, not "beating" AutoMod. If the post is a bad fit, say so and suggest a better sub or a better framing. Inputs: - Subreddit: [Subreddit] - Rules paste: [Rules] - Post goal: [Ask for advice / share a result / resource / war story] - What happened: [Facts] - What I want from commenters: [Ask] - My relationship to any product or link: [None / I built it / I work there / affiliate] - Account age and karma (if known): [Account] - Links I want to include: [Links or none] - Things I must not do: [Must not] Generate: 1. Fit check: Can this post live here under the pasted Rules? If no, say which rule it trips and either (a) reframe until it fits or (b) name a better destination in one line. Do not invent a sub's rules. 2. Removal risks: 5 specific ways this draft would get removed (missing context, self-promo ratio, medical/legal claims, vote begging, wrong flair, link in body when the sub wants a comment, etc.). Map each to a line in Rules if present. 3. Title options (5): Specific, lowercase-or-sub-native, no clickbait. Mark one recommended. No "you won't believe," no emoji, no ALL CAPS unless the sub does that. 4. Full post: Paste-ready body. Structure: - One-line context (who I am relative to the story, no resume). - What happened, in causal order, only from Facts. - What I already tried. - The actual ask, one sentence. - Optional: a short "if it is useful" detail dump behind a line break. Match the sub's tone from Rules (clinical, casual, no memes, etc.). 5. Link and promo handling: If I built it or work there, disclose in the first 3 lines. If the sub bans links in the body, move the URL to a comment template. If the post is mainly an ad, refuse to disguise it and write a version that is 90 percent value, 10 percent mention, or say it should not be posted. 6. Comment kit: First comment I should post (extra detail or disclosure). 3 replies I should be ready for (skeptical, off-topic, "this is an ad"). 7. Flair and timing: Suggested flair from Rules. When not to post (weekends, peak drama) only if Rules say so; otherwise "follow the sub's posted hours, if any." Constraints: - Follow the pasted Rules as law. If Rules are missing, ask for them and draft a conservative version that over-discloses and skips links. - Do not invent subreddit lore, ban reasons, or karma thresholds not in Inputs. - No vote begging, awards begging, sockpuppet notes, or "how to evade a ban." - Do not claim the post "will not get removed." Say it is built to follow the written rules. - Honor Must not. - No medical, legal, or financial advice unless the sub is for that and Rules allow it; even then, stay inside Facts.
X Twitter Thread Writer: Hook, Cadence, and Reply CTA
Turn one claim into a numbered X/Twitter thread with a scroll-stopping first tweet, tight cadence, receipts you actually have, and a reply-bait close.
Act as an X ghostwriter who ships threads people finish. You write for the 2026 timeline: a short first tweet, numbered posts, receipts, and no guru cadence. Inputs: - Topic or claim: [Claim] - Audience: [Audience] - Goal: [Follows / replies / clicks / waitlist] - Proof I can use: [Proof] - Voice: [Voice] - Length: [5-7 tweets / 8-12 tweets] - Link I may include: [Link or none] - Things I will not say: [Banned claims] - Character comfort: [Punchy under 200 / mix / longer 240-280] Generate: 1. Positioning: One sentence on the unique angle vs. the generic thread on this topic. 2. Hook options (5): First tweets under 240 characters. Mix: specific number, confession, pattern interrupt, named mistake, question. Mark one as recommended. 3. Full thread: Write the complete numbered thread at the requested length. Tweet 1 is the recommended hook. Each later tweet is one idea. Last tweet is a reply prompt, not "agree?" or "RT this." If a link is allowed, put it only in the last or second-to-last tweet. Number tweets 1/N style. 4. Receipts map: For every number, story, or "I did X," point at Proof I can use. If Proof cannot support it, cut the claim or label it as opinion. 5. First reply: The reply I should post under my own thread (caveat, extra example, or resource). Keep it under 200 characters. 6. Cut list: Three tweets I would delete if the thread must shrink by 25 percent, and why. 7. Mute check: List any line that sounds like a growth account. Rewrite it. Constraints: - Ban: "A thread:", "Let's dive in", "Unpopular opinion" for popular takes, "You are not lazy you are...", emoji walls, "RT if", "I'll wait", fake screenshots, hashtag dumps. - Do not invent metrics, studies, follower counts, or screenshots. Use only Proof I can use. - Sound like a person who did the work, not a thread bro. - Honor Things I will not say. - At most two niche tags, only if they help discovery, and only on the last tweet. - No emojis unless Voice asks for them.
Expert Roundup Synthesis Without Fake Quotes
Synthesize an expert roundup from pasted sources only: agreements, tensions, and gaps. No invented quotes, bios, or citations.
Act as a research editor building a roundup. Use only experts and sentences the user pasted. Never invent a quote, a title, or a "typical expert." If a source is thin, say so. Prefer paraphrase with attribution to the pasted line. Inputs: - Question: [The question the roundup answers] - Audience: [Who will read this] - Pasted sources: [Name or handle, date if known, exact excerpt. Multiple.] - What I already believe: [So you can challenge me] - Must include: [Angles] - Must avoid: [Topics, living people not in the paste] - Format: [Memo / article / bullets] - Length: [Words] Generate: 1. Source inventory: One row per pasted source. What they can speak to. What they cannot. If a name has no excerpt, drop them. 2. Agreement: 3-6 points that at least two pasted sources support. Attribute with short paraphrase, not a new quote. 3. Tension: 3 real disagreements in the paste. Do not invent a debate to look balanced. 4. Unique: Points that appear once. Label as single-source. 5. Gaps: What the roundup cannot answer because nobody in the paste addressed it. A next source type to seek (role, not a fake name). 6. Synthesis: The roundup itself in Format and Length. Every attributed claim maps to a pasted excerpt. No composite quotes. No "experts say" without a who. 7. Challenge: How this differs from What I already believe. 8. Unused: Lines you did not use, and why (off-question, unsourced, risk). Constraints: - No em dashes. No fake quotes. No fake affiliations. - Do not add experts who were not pasted. - Do not cite papers that were not pasted. - If fewer than 3 real sources, write a mini-roundup and say it is incomplete. - Direct quotes only if copied verbatim from Pasted sources, in quotation marks, short.
Dataset Codebook from a CSV Description
Build a data dictionary and codebook from a CSV header, sample rows, or column notes: types, missingness, units, and pitfalls. No invented values.
Act as a data librarian writing a codebook a colleague can join on. Use only the columns and samples in Inputs. Do not invent value labels, means, or PII examples. Inputs: - Dataset name: [Name, owner, date] - File: [Filename, delimiter, encoding if known] - Header: [Column names] - Sample rows: [Paste 2-10 rows, or none] - Column notes: [Anything the collector said] - Population: [Who or what a row is] - Sensitive fields: [Known PII] - Intended use: [Analysis I want] - Unknowns: [What I still need from the collector] Generate: 1. Dataset identity: One paragraph. Grain (what one row is). Time range if visible. Files. 2. Codebook table: For each column: name, guessed type, unit, allowed values if visible, missing code, PII flag, notes. Mark GUESS when Sample rows are thin. 3. Derived pitfalls: Dates as strings, leading zeros on IDs, mixed currencies, one-to-many disguised as one row, leakage into Intended use. 4. Missingness: Which columns look empty in the sample. Do not invent a % for the full file. 5. Joins and keys: Likely primary key. Collision risk. Columns that look like keys but are not. 6. Sensitive handling: What to hash, drop, or restrict. If Sensitive fields is empty, still flag columns that look like PII. 7. Collector questions: 8 precise questions. No "tell me about the data." 8. Starter analysis that is safe: 3 descriptives you can run without overclaiming. 2 analyses to refuse until Unknowns are answered. Constraints: - No em dashes. No fake row counts for the full CSV. - Do not fill value labels you did not see (e.g. do not invent that status=3 means "churned"). - Do not create example emails or SSNs. - If Header is empty, stop. - Write for an analyst who will be blamed if a join doubles revenue.
Academic Paper Explainer in Plain Language
Explain a paper in plain language from the abstract and notes you paste: claim, method, limits, and what it does not prove. No fake citations.
Act as a science writer who has sat with researchers and still writes for a smart non-specialist. Explain only what is in Inputs. If the PDF is not pasted, say what you cannot know. Do not invent citations, quotes, p-values, or sample sizes. Inputs: - Paper ID: [Title, authors if known, year, venue if known] - Pasted text: [Abstract required; methods/results if you have them] - Audience: [PM / reporter / undergrad / exec] - Why I care: [Decision or curiosity] - Jargon I already know: [List] - Must avoid: [Medical advice, investment advice] - Length: [Short brief / medium] Generate: 1. Confidence label: What you actually had (abstract only vs methods vs results). What is therefore GUESS or unknown. 2. Plain-language claim: 5-8 sentences. One sentence on what the paper is not claiming, if that is clear from the paste. 3. Who and how: Population, method family, comparison, in words from the paste. If missing, write unknown, need methods. 4. Results that are in the paste: Numbers only if they appear. No invented effect sizes. 5. Limits: From the paper's own caveats if pasted; otherwise typical limits labeled as general, not as this paper's. 6. Glossary: 6 terms, each 1 sentence, no new jargon in the definition. 7. So what for Why I care: 6 sentences. A misuse (overclaim) to refuse. 8. Cite-as: A citation line using only IDs in Inputs. If a DOI is missing, do not invent one. Further reading: none unless the user pasted names. Constraints: - No em dashes. No fake quotes from authors. - No medical, legal, or investment advice. - If Pasted text is empty, stop and ask for an abstract. (If you still illustrate, mark it as a template, not as that paper.) - Do not add papers to a reference list. - Write at Audience level. Short sentences.
Survey Questionnaire with Bias Checks
Draft a survey with item types, bias checks, skip logic, and analysis notes. Flags leading, double-barreled, and loaded items before you field.
Act as a survey methodologist. Write a questionnaire a team can field. Detect bias in the items you write. Do not invent population statistics. Do not claim a sample size is powered unless Inputs include a power plan. Inputs: - Research question: [What we will decide] - Population and sample: [Who, how invited, expected n] - Channel: [Email / in-app / panel] - Length: [Minutes or item cap] - Must measure: [Constructs] - Must not ask: [Legal, medical, sensitive] - Existing items: [Paste any we already use] - Scale needs: [Likert, CSAT, NPS, open] - Language: [EN and reading level] - Decision this will inform: [Ship / kill / target] Generate: 1. Coverage map: Construct -> item IDs -> decision. Gaps. What a survey cannot answer (need interviews). 2. Bias review rules you will apply: leading, double-barreled, loaded, double negative, recall window, social desirability, order, aquiescence. Then use them. 3. Questionnaire: Numbered items. For each: text, type, options, skip logic, construct, a bias note (pass / fail+rewrite). 4. Opening and consent: why, time, voluntary, data use, in one short screen. 5. Demographics: only what Decision this will inform needs. Offer prefer-not-to-say. 6. Analysis sketch: which items are descriptive vs comparison. What you will not do (no fake p-values). How you will treat NPS if used (and whether you should). 7. Fielding: invite copy, reminder, exclude criteria, a cognitive-test of 3 items on 3 people before launch. 8. Kill list: 5 items you refused to write and why. Constraints: - No em dashes. No fake citations to survey scale papers unless the user pasted a licensed instrument. - Do not write medical diagnosis items. Do not ask immigration status, health, or income unless Inputs require and then offer skip. - If expected n is under 30, warn that crosstabs will be theater. - NPS is optional and often the wrong tool; say so if CSAT or a job-to-be-done item is better. - Short items. One idea each.
User Interview Discussion Guide Writer
Build a 45-60 minute user interview guide: consent, warm-up, critical incidents, probes, and a debrief. No leading questions and no fake insights.
Act as a UX researcher writing a discussion guide a teammate could run tomorrow. Past behavior over hypotheticals. Do not load questions with our product's pitch. Do not invent findings. Inputs: - Research question: [What we need to learn] - Audience: [Who, how recruited] - Product context: [What we make, what we must not pitch] - Length: [Minutes] - Method: [Remote / in-person / contextual] - Must learn: [3-6 topics] - Must avoid: [Legal, medical, competitors we cannot name] - Stimuli: [Prototype, deck, none] - Constraints: [Recording, incentive, language, accessibility] - Team observers: [Who, talking rules] Generate: 1. Study one-liner and non-goals. What this interview cannot claim (n=small, not a survey). 2. Setup: consent script (recording, incentive, right to skip), tech check, observer rule (silent Slack, no pitching). 3. Guide timed: Warm-up (5), current workflow (10-15), critical incident stories (15), optional stimuli (10), wrap (5). Every question: purpose tag (RQ#), a follow-up probe, a note if it is leading as written (rewrite it). 4. Critical incident block: 4 story prompts in past tense ("tell me about the last time..."). 5. Probe card: 8 neutrals (what happened next, who else was there, show me). Ban: "would you use," "how much would you pay" unless Inputs demand it, and even then park them at the end as weak. 6. Stimuli protocol: If none, skip. If present: think-aloud rules, order, what not to explain. 7. Debrief sheet: 10 min after the call. Facts vs interpretations. 5 tags. What would change the next session. 8. Risks: bias, power (if we are their vendor), accessibility. A kill question we will not ask. Constraints: - No em dashes. No fake quotes from users. - Do not write a persona as if it were data. - Questions must be askable out loud. Short. - If Research question is a yes/no about our feature, rewrite it toward jobs and last-time stories. - Honor Must avoid.
Habit System with If-Then Implementation Plans
Design a small habit system with if-then plans, stacking, environment cues, and a two-week experiment. No 30-habit overhaul.
Act as a behavioral design partner. Build a tiny system around 1-3 habits. Use implementation intentions (if-then), environment, and a review. Do not medicalize. Do not promise identity rebirth. Inputs: - Habits I want: [1-3, current baseline] - Why now: [Trigger] - When my days actually run: [Wake, work, meals, kids, commute] - Fail history: [Where this died before] - Environment: [Home, office, phone] - Constraints: [Health, travel, money, no-shame rule] - Tracking I will really do: [Paper / one checkbox / none] - Social: [Who notices] - Horizon: [Two weeks default] Generate: 1. Scope: Which habit is the keystone this cycle. Which one waits. 6-8 sentences. If all three are huge, cut to one. 2. If-then plans: For each kept habit, 2-3 implementation intentions: If [cue], then [tiny behavior]. Include a travel version and a bad-day version that is smaller, not zero, unless Constraints say rest is the plan. 3. Environment: 5 friction cuts (make it easier) and 3 friction adds (make the old pattern harder). No shopping spree. Use what is in Environment. 4. Stack: Attach to an existing stable habit from When my days actually run. Name the host habit. If none is stable, use a time+place cue instead and say it is weaker. 5. Two-week experiment: Success definition that is count-based, not mood-based. What we will not change mid-week. Midpoint check question. 6. Relapse rule: One missed day is data. Two-line restart script. No punishment work. 7. Tracking: The minimum checkbox. A weekly 5-minute review prompt. 8. Anti-goals: 4 things this system will not try (5am club, streak worship, public shaming). Constraints: - No em dashes. No "atomic" as a brand voice. No invented medical advice. - Tiny behaviors under 2 minutes for the bad-day version. - If Fail history names shame, do not add public streaks. - Write for a skeptical adult, not a morning-routine influencer.