The ChatGPT Prompt Cheat Sheet: 27 Reusable Formulas

Here is my draft: [PASTE TEXT]. Rewrite it three times at increasing intensity. Rung 1: fix only grammar and clarity — change nothing else. Rung 2: also tighten it by about 25% and improve flow. Rung 3: full rewrite for maximum impact, any structure you want, same core message. Label each rung so I can choose how much editing I accept.

Rewrite the text below so the content stays identical but the tone becomes [TARGET TONE — e.g. warm but direct, like a trusted colleague delivering hard news]. Currently it sounds [CURRENT TONE — e.g. stiff and corporate]. Keep every fact, number, and commitment unchanged. Text: [PASTE TEXT].

Cut the text below by [PERCENTAGE, e.g. 30%] without losing any ideas. Remove filler phrases, redundant sentences, throat-clearing openers, and hedge words. Do not compress by summarizing — compress by deleting what was not pulling weight. Then list the five worst offenders you cut, so I learn my own patterns. Text: [PASTE TEXT].

Here are two samples of my writing: Sample 1: [PASTE 150+ WORDS]. Sample 2: [PASTE 150+ WORDS]. Study the sentence length, rhythm, vocabulary, and quirks. Now write [NEW PIECE — e.g. a LinkedIn post about our product launch] in my voice. It should pass as something I wrote on a good day — not a parody of me, and not generic AI polish.

Write [NUMBER, e.g. 12] headline options for [PIECE — e.g. a blog post about remote onboarding mistakes]. Split them across three angles: a third driven by curiosity, a third by a specific number or concrete detail, a third by a bold claim. Hard limit: [CHARACTER COUNT] characters. Then mark your top two picks and give one sentence on why each would win.

Turn these rough bullets into a [FORMAT — e.g. 600-word blog section / a one-page memo / a 90-second script] for [AUDIENCE]. My bullets: [PASTE BULLETS, MESSY IS FINE]. Keep my points in a logical order (reorder if mine is wrong), add transitions, and flag any spot where you had to guess my meaning with [CHECK: your assumption] so I can verify.

Summarize the text below in [NUMBER, e.g. 5] bullet points. Then add a final section called "So what" with 2-3 sentences on what this means specifically for [YOUR ROLE/SITUATION — e.g. a product manager deciding whether to build on this platform]. Text: [PASTE TEXT OR REPORT].

I am deciding: [DECISION OR DEBATED QUESTION]. Make the strongest honest case FOR it, as its smartest advocate would. Then make the strongest honest case AGAINST it — no strawmen on either side. Finish with: the single piece of evidence or information that would most decisively settle this, and where I might get it.

Extract every [ENTITY — e.g. customer complaint / commitment / deadline / price mentioned] from the text below into a table with columns: [COLUMN 1], [COLUMN 2], [COLUMN 3]. One row per item, no items skipped or merged. Write "unknown" in any cell the text does not answer — do not infer or fill gaps. Text: [PASTE MESSY TEXT, EMAILS, OR NOTES].

Here is my plan: [PASTE PLAN, STRATEGY, OR PITCH]. List every assumption it rests on — including the implicit ones I have not stated. For each: rate how load-bearing it is (does the plan survive if this is wrong?) and how confident I should actually be in it. Then name the one assumption I should pressure-test first, and a cheap way to test it this week.

Compare [OPTION A] vs [OPTION B] (add [OPTION C] if relevant) for my specific situation: [DESCRIBE — budget, team size, constraints, what you are optimizing for]. Use these criteria: [LIST 3-5 CRITERIA THAT MATTER TO YOU]. Show a table scoring each option per criterion with one line of reasoning, then give a recommendation for MY situation — not a "both are great" non-answer.

Below are raw meeting notes. Produce three sections: (1) Action items as a table — task, owner, deadline; if owner or deadline was not stated, write "UNASSIGNED" rather than guessing. (2) Decisions made, one line each. (3) Open questions that were raised but not resolved. Nothing else — no summary of the discussion. Notes: [PASTE NOTES OR TRANSCRIPT].

Write an email to [RECIPIENT + RELATIONSHIP — e.g. a long-term client who is consistently late paying]. Goal: [WHAT MUST HAPPEN — e.g. they pay the overdue invoice within 7 days]. It must also: [PRESERVE/AVOID — e.g. preserve the relationship, avoid sounding legalistic]. Tone: [TONE]. Under [NUMBER] words. Give me two versions: one more direct, one more diplomatic.

Help me write a one-page decision memo on: [DECISION]. Structure: the decision in one sentence; background in 3 sentences max; options considered ([LIST THEM]) with the strongest point for and against each; my recommendation ([STATE IT]) and reasoning; what would change my mind. My raw notes: [PASTE CONTEXT]. Keep it under 400 words — it should be readable in two minutes.

Brainstorm [NUMBER, e.g. 20] ideas for [PROBLEM OR GOAL]. Phase 1 — diverge: no filtering, include obvious ones, weird ones, and at least three that seem impractical. Number them. Phase 2 — converge: evaluate the full list against [CRITERIA — e.g. cost under $1k, shippable in 2 weeks] and pick the top 3 with one sentence of reasoning each.

I just joined a team and keep hearing about [SYSTEM, PROCESS, OR JARGON — e.g. "our attribution model" or "the quarterly QBR process"]. Explain what it is, why organizations have it, what typically goes wrong with it, and the 3 questions a sharp new hire should ask about OUR version of it. Assume I am smart but have zero background in [DOMAIN].

[PROBLEM — e.g. paste a pricing calculation, a logic puzzle, a policy question with several conditions]. Work through this step by step, showing your reasoning at each stage before moving to the next. Consider what could make each step wrong. Only after the full walkthrough, state your final answer on its own line beginning with "ANSWER:".

Do this in three passes, all in one response. Pass 1: [TASK — e.g. write a cold outreach email to a podcast host]. Pass 2: critique your own draft harshly against these criteria: [CRITERIA — e.g. would a busy person read past line one? is there one clear ask? does it sound human?]. Pass 3: rewrite it fixing every flaw you found. Show all three passes.

I want to end up with [DELIVERABLE — e.g. a personal statement / a business plan outline / a difficult performance review]. Instead of drafting from what little I have told you, interview me: ask one question at a time, follow up on interesting threads, and push back where I am vague. After [NUMBER, e.g. 6-8] questions, tell me you have enough and produce the deliverable using my actual answers.

Process the input below and return ONLY [EXACT FORMAT — e.g. valid JSON with keys "name", "priority" (1-5), and "next_step"; or: a markdown table with exactly these columns]. No introduction, no explanation, no closing remarks, no code fences around it. If the input is unprocessable, return [DEFINED ERROR FORMAT — e.g. {"error": "reason"}] instead. Input: [PASTE INPUT].

Create [DELIVERABLE — e.g. a tagline / an opening paragraph / a workshop title] for [BRIEF — audience, subject, goal]. Give me three meaningfully different takes: SAFE — the solid, expected approach; BOLD — takes a real risk in angle or tone; WILD — ignores at least one convention entirely. Label each and add one line on the trade-off it makes.