Claude Prompt Library

Claude Prompts for Architectural Practice

20 copy-paste prompts

20 copy-paste Claude prompts for architects: design briefs, code research, schematic narratives, client communication, specifications, and the practice management work that eats studio hours.

Design + Briefs

4 prompts

Programming Brief from Client Conversation

1/20

[Paste client meeting notes]. Build programming brief: spaces required + sf, adjacency requirements, performance criteria (acoustic / thermal / lighting), aesthetic direction, budget alignment, schedule alignment, sustainability targets, accessibility requirements. Flag where client said opposing things — needs reconciliation.

Builds programming briefs from client notes.

💡

Pro tip: Clients say contradictory things across meetings ("we want maximum natural light" + "no heat gain"). Surfacing contradictions early = shorter design phase. Hidden until DD = expensive rework.

Schematic Design Narrative

2/20

Write SD narrative for [project]. Output: design intent (vision in plain language), site response, organizational concept, materiality direction, sustainability strategy, key design moves explained, departures from program (with rationale). Client-presentable + permit-suitable.

Writes schematic design narratives.

💡

Pro tip: SD narrative does double duty: client comprehension + permitting basis. Plain-language client sections + technical permit sections = two-version doc serving both. Most narratives only serve one.

Design Critique + Pinup Prep

3/20

[Paste design description or attach images]. Pre-pinup critique: design intent vs execution gaps, material/detail issues, organizational logic holes, programmatic violations, code concerns, what jurors will press hardest on. Honest critique = better presentation than peer compliments.

Critiques designs pre-pinup.

💡

Pro tip: Studio peer critiques = polite. Honest critique catches what jurors will catch + 24 hours earlier. Time to fix before public exposure = saved face + better project.

Material Palette Justification

4/20

Justify material palette for [project]. Materials: [list]. Per material: design intent it serves, performance basis, durability + maintenance, sustainability profile, cost positioning, alternatives considered + why rejected. Client + sustainability-minded reviewer expects justification.

Justifies material palette decisions.

💡

Pro tip: Material decisions visible to clients ("why this stone?"). Justification beyond "it looks nice" = professionalism. Performance + sustainability + cost framing = credible.

XML tags are just the start. Learn the full Claude workflow.

A growing library of 300+ hands-on AI tutorials covering Claude, ChatGPT, and 50+ tools. New tutorials added every week.

Start 7-Day Free Trial

Code + Compliance

4 prompts

Code Research Summary

5/20

[Project type, jurisdiction]. Research applicable codes: IBC occupancy classification, fire/egress requirements, accessibility (ADA + state), zoning + use, energy codes, structural standards, mechanical/electrical code intersections. Output: applicable codes + sections, key constraints driving design, where I might conflict, expert review recommended.

Researches building codes.

💡

Pro tip: Code research at programming = avoid expensive redesign at DD. Ignored at programming = "wait, can't have stair here" at DD. Front-load.

Egress Calculation Verification

6/20

[Paste plan + occupancy info]. Verify egress: occupant load by room, egress paths, travel distance, common path of travel, dead ends, exit width, exit signs + emergency lighting. Flag code violations + suggest fixes. Always verify against current code; this is brainstorm-and-check.

Verifies egress calculations.

💡

Pro tip: Egress mistakes = re-permit. Catching at SD = simple. At permit submission = expensive redesign + delay. AI as second-eye is cheap insurance.

Sustainability Scorecard Prep

7/20

Project: [describe]. Help build LEED/WELL/Living Building scorecard: applicable certification level, points easily achievable, points requiring design changes, point cost (design effort + capital), realistic certification target, where to push for higher level. Honest: stretching for cert without budget = abandoned mid-project.

Builds sustainability scorecards.

💡

Pro tip: Honest scorecard up front = realistic certification target. Aspirational scorecard without budget = abandoned at DD. Honesty preserves the goal.

Accessibility Audit

8/20

[Paste design/plan]. ADA + state accessibility audit: common-fail areas (door clearances, lever hardware, mounting heights, slope, parking, restrooms), risk areas, suggested fixes. Flag where designer-default isn't code-compliant. Always cross-check with current ADAAG + state amendments.

Audits accessibility compliance.

💡

Pro tip: Accessibility violations costly + create risk. Catching at design = simple fix. Catching post-construction = retrofit + lawsuits. AI audit = cheap pre-permit pass.

Client + Project Communication

4 prompts

Client Meeting Agenda

9/20

Client meeting agenda for [phase]. Output: pre-read materials, agenda items in order (decisions needed first, info-share later, action items last), decision rights per item, time allocation, expected outcomes, follow-up commitments. Meetings without agenda = circular conversation + no decisions.

Builds client meeting agendas.

💡

Pro tip: Meeting where decisions deferred = lost cycle. Agenda forcing decisions = momentum. Hour-long agenda-less meeting = same outcome as 20-min agenda-driven meeting.

Decision Document for Client

10/20

Decision document. Decision: [describe]. Output: decision being made, options considered (3 typical), pros/cons each, recommendation with rationale, deadline by which client must decide, consequences of delay. Sign-off line. Verbal decisions get re-litigated; written ones don't.

Writes client decision documents.

💡

Pro tip: "I thought we decided X" = endless rework. Written decision documents signed = closure. Sounds bureaucratic; saves projects.

Bad News Communication

11/20

Need to deliver bad news to client: [describe — over budget, schedule slip, code constraint changed scope]. Help me draft message. Output: lead with the news (no burying), context for why, options going forward (3 with tradeoffs), my recommendation, ask for response. Honest + solutions-oriented.

Communicates bad news to clients.

💡

Pro tip: Bad news buried in email = trust loss when found. Bad news led with + options framed = professional. Clients respect architects who handle hard news directly.

Site Visit Report

12/20

[Paste site visit notes]. Convert to formal site visit report. Output: date + attendees, observations by trade, deviations from drawings + severity, clarifications needed, action items + owners, photographs reference, next visit. Documents what + when + who said. Permit + claim trail.

Writes site visit reports.

💡

Pro tip: Site visit reports = legal record. Inconsistent reports = exposed during dispute. Consistent format = defensible practice.

These prompts give you the what. Tutorials give you the why.

Learn when to use extended thinking, how to build Claude Projects, and workflows that compound. 300+ tutorials and growing.

Try AI Academy Free

Practice Operations

4 prompts

Fee Proposal Letter

13/20

Fee proposal for [project type, scope, schedule]. Output: scope of services per phase (SD/DD/CD/CA), fee per phase, additional services framework (with rates), reimbursables, schedule milestones, payment terms, exclusions. Legal-precise + readable.

Writes fee proposal letters.

💡

Pro tip: Vague fee proposals = scope creep without comp. Specific scope per phase + change-order framework = profitable + clear. Boring fee proposals serve you.

Specification Section Writing

14/20

Write CSI MasterFormat spec section for [system]. Output: Part 1 (general — scope, references, submittals), Part 2 (products — manufacturers, materials, performance), Part 3 (execution — installation, testing, cleanup). Specific products named where appropriate. AIA-compatible.

Writes CSI MasterFormat specs.

💡

Pro tip: Specifications are legal docs. AI draft = first pass; expert review essential. CSI structure consistent = contractor pricing accurate; non-standard format = inflated bids from contractor uncertainty.

RFI Response Drafting

15/20

RFI from contractor: [paste]. Help draft response. Output: clarification of intent, design decision if needed, drawing/spec reference, who else needs notification, schedule impact assessment, fee impact (if any). Architect liability concern: don't guess; if uncertain, defer to engineer.

Drafts RFI responses.

💡

Pro tip: Casual email response to RFI = liability. Formal RFI response = record. Always defer to engineer of record on structural/MEP; architect coordinates but doesn't guess on others' disciplines.

Project Post-Mortem

16/20

Post-mortem on [completed project]. Output: budget vs actual, schedule vs actual, fee profitability, scope creep cost, what went well, what failed, lessons applied to next project. Studios that don't post-mortem = repeat mistakes. Project as data.

Runs project post-mortems.

💡

Pro tip: Architecture firms famously bad at post-mortems (move to next project, don't analyze). Disciplined post-mortems = compounding learning + improving fees. Most lucrative habit firms ignore.

Frequently Asked Questions

It knows IBC + ADA + LEED basics + intermediate. Local amendments + recent code changes + AHJ interpretations = unreliable. Use Claude for first-pass research; verify against current jurisdiction code + AHJ. Brainstorm tool, not code authority.
No native CAD/BIM. Claude reasons about programming, narratives, code, specifications. Visual design happens in Revit/Rhino/SketchUp. Claude as the writing/research assistant; design tools for design.
Architect of record signs the drawings. AI drafts don't change liability. Use AI for productivity + quality (catching errors); human review + sign-off remains required. Don't skip review because "AI said it's fine."
Specifications drafts, code research, client communication, fee proposals, project documentation. Areas where small firms have less staff = AI replaces missing department. Big firms have specialists; small firms have AI.
No. Building design is judgment + relationships + on-site reality. Documentation + research + admin shrinks with AI. Architects who use AI well will out-deliver firms that don't. Same as every prior tech wave.

Prompts are the starting line. Tutorials are the finish.

A growing library of 300+ hands-on tutorials on ChatGPT, Claude, Midjourney, and 50+ AI tools. New tutorials added every week.

7-day free trial. Cancel anytime.