30 Claude Prompts for Discovery Calls

You are a sales operations analyst who cleans up rep notes before they enter the CRM. <context> I took messy shorthand notes during a discovery call and I need them turned into structured notes I can paste into our CRM opportunity record. </context> <inputs> - Raw notes: [PASTE RAW NOTES] - Account name: [ACCOUNT NAME] - Call date: [CALL DATE] - Our CRM's required fields: [LIST OF REQUIRED FIELDS] </inputs> <task> Organize the raw notes into the required CRM fields, filling each field only with information actually present in the notes. </task> <constraints> Do not invent details not present in the raw notes. If a required field has no supporting information, write NOT DISCUSSED for that field. Keep each field to two sentences maximum. </constraints> <format> One line per required field, formatted as Field Name colon then the content. </format>

You are an executive assistant who is excellent at pulling commitments out of long meeting transcripts. <context> I have a full transcript of a discovery call and I need every action item pulled out with who owns it, since these get missed when I just skim my notes. </context> <inputs> - Transcript: [PASTE TRANSCRIPT] - My name: [YOUR NAME] - Prospect names on the call: [PROSPECT NAMES] </inputs> <task> List every action item mentioned in the transcript, who is responsible for it, and any deadline that was stated or implied. </task> <constraints> Only include items that were explicitly agreed to, not things merely mentioned in passing. If no deadline was stated, write NO DATE GIVEN rather than guessing one. Limit to the ten most concrete items. </constraints> <format> A table with three columns: Action Item, Owner, Deadline. </format>

You are an account executive briefing your sales manager on a call they missed. <context> My manager was not on this discovery call and asks for a two minute brief before our pipeline review, so I need a short summary that gets them up to speed fast. </context> <inputs> - Call notes or transcript: [PASTE NOTES OR TRANSCRIPT] - Deal size estimate: [DEAL SIZE] - Current deal stage: [DEAL STAGE] - My biggest concern about this deal: [YOUR CONCERN] </inputs> <task> Write a manager brief covering what was discussed, what looks promising, what is a risk, and what I need from my manager if anything. </task> <constraints> Keep the whole brief under 120 words. Lead with the risk if the deal has one, not with the positives. Do not use sales jargon like synergy or circle back. </constraints> <format> Four short labeled lines: Discussed, Promising, Risk, Ask. </format>

You are a proposal writer who mines call notes for language to reuse in the customer's own words. <context> I want to pull direct quotes from a discovery call that describe pain in the prospect's own language, so I can mirror it back in the proposal instead of using my own phrasing. </context> <inputs> - Call notes or transcript: [PASTE NOTES OR TRANSCRIPT] - Pain area we are solving: [PAIN AREA] - Prospect's name and title: [NAME AND TITLE] </inputs> <task> Extract up to five direct or near direct quotes about the stated pain area, each attributed to the speaker who said it. </task> <constraints> Only pull language that closely matches what is actually in the notes, do not paraphrase into something more polished. Skip generic statements that could apply to any vendor. Mark uncertain wording with APPROXIMATE. </constraints> <format> A numbered list, each item as a quote followed by the speaker name in parentheses. </format>

You are a deal desk analyst who checks accounts for inconsistent information before a deal closes. <context> We have talked to this account twice and I suspect the story changed between calls, so I want the two sets of notes compared for contradictions before I trust the numbers in the deal. </context> <inputs> - Notes from call one, dated [CALL ONE DATE]: [PASTE NOTES ONE] - Notes from call two, dated [CALL TWO DATE]: [PASTE NOTES TWO] </inputs> <task> Compare the two sets of notes and list any facts, numbers, or stated priorities that contradict each other between the two calls. </task> <constraints> Only flag genuine contradictions, not new information that simply adds detail. State both versions side by side for each contradiction found. If nothing contradicts, say so plainly. </constraints> <format> A numbered list of contradictions, each showing Call One said then Call Two said. </format>

You are a sales manager who scores every new opportunity before it enters the forecast. <context> I just finished a discovery call and need an honest BANT score before I decide whether to invest more time in this account. </context> <inputs> - Call notes: [PASTE NOTES] - Deal size estimate: [DEAL SIZE] - Stated timeline: [STATED TIMELINE] - Who I spoke with: [CONTACT TITLE] </inputs> <task> Score the opportunity on Budget, Authority, Need, and Timeline as Strong, Weak, or Unknown, with a one sentence reason for each score based only on what is in the notes. </task> <constraints> Do not upgrade a score just because the deal is large or exciting. Mark Unknown honestly when the notes do not cover that dimension, rather than guessing Weak or Strong. Keep each reason under 20 words. </constraints> <format> Four lines, one per BANT letter, formatted as Letter colon Score colon Reason. </format>

You are a senior enterprise account executive who uses MEDDIC to qualify large deals before committing resources. <context> This is a large complex deal and I want to run it through MEDDIC properly instead of relying on gut feel, since a bad forecast call here costs real credibility with my manager. </context> <inputs> - Call notes and account research: [PASTE NOTES] - Deal size: [DEAL SIZE] - Champion identified so far: [CHAMPION NAME AND TITLE, OR NONE YET] </inputs> <task> Assess the deal against each MEDDIC element (Metrics, Economic Buyer, Decision Criteria, Decision Process, Identify Pain, Champion) and flag which elements are still missing evidence. </task> <constraints> For each element, cite the specific fact from the notes that supports it, or state MISSING if there is none. Do not mark Champion present unless someone has shown real internal advocacy, not just friendliness. Keep it to one line per element. </constraints> <format> Six lines, one per MEDDIC element, each showing the element name, status, and supporting evidence or MISSING. </format>

You are a sales manager who protects the team's time by disqualifying bad-fit leads quickly and clearly. <context> I think this lead is not a good fit after the discovery call and I need to document why clearly enough that no one reopens it without new information. </context> <inputs> - Call notes: [PASTE NOTES] - Our ideal customer profile: [ICP DESCRIPTION] - Where this lead diverges from ICP: [DIVERGENCE NOTES] </inputs> <task> Write a disqualification note explaining specifically why this lead does not match our ideal customer profile, and what would need to change for it to become qualified again. </task> <constraints> Base the reasoning only on facts from the call notes, not assumptions about the company. Be respectful of the prospect in tone, this may be read by others later. Keep it to four sentences. </constraints> <format> A short paragraph followed by one line starting with Reopen if colon describing the condition that would revive the lead. </format>

You are a sales manager who sanity-checks budget claims against historical deal data before reps get too invested. <context> A prospect gave a budget number on the call and I want to know if it lines up with what deals like this typically close at, before I build a proposal around it. </context> <inputs> - Stated budget: [STATED BUDGET] - Company size and industry: [COMPANY SIZE AND INDUSTRY] - Typical deal size for similar companies: [TYPICAL DEAL SIZE RANGE] - What the budget is supposed to cover: [SCOPE OF STATED BUDGET] </inputs> <task> Assess whether the stated budget is realistic for the scope described, and flag if it looks underscoped, overscoped, or roughly in line. </task> <constraints> Give a direct verdict, not a hedge, but explain the reasoning in one or two sentences. If information is too thin to judge, say so plainly instead of forcing a verdict. Do not recommend a specific price to quote. </constraints> <format> One line verdict (Underscoped, Overscoped, or In Line) followed by a short paragraph of reasoning. </format>

You are a sales strategist who reads between the lines to judge how urgently a prospect actually needs to solve their problem. <context> Prospects often say a project is urgent when it is not, and I want an honest read on real urgency based on the specific things said in this call, not the label the prospect put on it. </context> <inputs> - Call notes: [PASTE NOTES] - Stated urgency in prospect's own words: [PROSPECTS URGENCY STATEMENT] - Any external forcing event mentioned: [FORCING EVENT OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Evaluate whether the urgency is real by looking for a genuine forcing event, budget already allocated, or a hard deadline, versus urgency that is just enthusiasm. </task> <constraints> Distinguish real forcing events from soft language like wanting to move fast. Give a rating of High, Medium, or Low urgency with the specific evidence behind it. Do not accept the prospect's self-described urgency at face value. </constraints> <format> One line with the urgency rating, followed by two to three bullet points of supporting evidence. </format>

You are an account executive who always sends a recap email the same day a call happens to keep the deal moving. <context> I just got off a discovery call and want a recap email drafted that confirms what we discussed and locks in the next step before the prospect's attention moves elsewhere. </context> <inputs> - Call notes: [PASTE NOTES] - Prospect first name: [PROSPECT FIRST NAME] - Agreed next step: [NEXT STEP] - Next step date: [NEXT STEP DATE] </inputs> <task> Draft a recap email that confirms the main points discussed, restates the pain in the prospect's own words, and confirms the agreed next step with the date. </task> <constraints> Keep it under 150 words. Do not introduce new claims about the product that were not discussed on the call. Sign off with a clear single call to action, not multiple asks. </constraints> <format> A ready to send email with subject line, greeting, body, and sign off. </format>

You are a sales manager who insists on mutual action plans for any deal past the first call. <context> Our last call had multiple steps for both sides and I want them formalized into a mutual action plan document instead of scattered across an email. </context> <inputs> - Call notes: [PASTE NOTES] - Target close date: [TARGET CLOSE DATE] - Steps my side owns: [OUR STEPS] - Steps the prospect's side owns: [PROSPECT STEPS] </inputs> <task> Build a mutual action plan listing every step, who owns it (us or them), and a target date working backward from the close date. </task> <constraints> Every step must have an owner and a date, no step left open ended. Order steps chronologically. Do not include more than eight total steps, combine minor ones if needed. </constraints> <format> A table with three columns: Step, Owner, Target Date, ordered earliest to latest. </format>

You are an account executive who keeps stalled deals warm without sounding desperate. <context> The prospect went quiet after a promising call and gave no clear next step, and I need a follow-up that reopens the conversation without sounding like I am chasing them. </context> <inputs> - Last call notes: [PASTE NOTES] - Days since last contact: [NUMBER OF DAYS] - Prospect first name: [PROSPECT FIRST NAME] - New information or angle I have since the call: [NEW INFORMATION OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Write a short follow-up email that references something specific from the last call, offers the new information if there is any, and asks one direct low-pressure question. </task> <constraints> Under 100 words. No guilt tripping language like just following up or per my last email. Only one question at the end, not a list of asks. Do not sound apologetic for reaching out. </constraints> <format> A ready to send email with subject line and body only, no extra commentary. </format>

You are an account executive who posts quick deal updates in a team Slack channel after key calls. <context> I want a short Slack style update posted to my team after this call so teammates and my manager see momentum without reading a full email thread. </context> <inputs> - Call notes: [PASTE NOTES] - Deal name: [DEAL NAME] - Deal stage before this call: [PREVIOUS STAGE] - Deal stage after this call: [NEW STAGE] </inputs> <task> Write a short Slack update announcing the stage change, the key takeaway from the call, and the next milestone to watch for. </task> <constraints> Under 60 words total. Use plain conversational tone appropriate for a team channel, not a formal report. Include one emoji at most, and only if it fits naturally. </constraints> <format> A single short paragraph ready to paste into Slack, no headers or bullet points. </format>

You are a sales rep who tracks personal commitments from every call in a simple checklist so nothing slips. <context> I made several commitments on this call and I want them turned into a checklist with deadlines I can drop straight into my task manager. </context> <inputs> - Call notes: [PASTE NOTES] - Commitments I made on the call: [LIST OF COMMITMENTS] - Call date: [CALL DATE] </inputs> <task> Turn each commitment into a checklist item with a realistic deadline calculated from the call date, ordered by urgency. </task> <constraints> Every item needs a specific date, not a vague timeframe like soon. Order the most urgent item first. Do not add commitments that were not explicitly stated in the notes. </constraints> <format> A plain checklist with one item per line, each ending in the deadline date in parentheses. </format>

You are a strategic account manager who maps every stakeholder in a deal before it goes too far with just one contact. <context> I only have one contact on this deal so far, but names of other people came up during the call, and I want them organized into a stakeholder map so I know who else to reach. </context> <inputs> - Call notes: [PASTE NOTES] - My main contact name and title: [MAIN CONTACT] - Other names mentioned: [OTHER NAMES MENTIONED] </inputs> <task> Build a stakeholder map listing each person mentioned, their likely role in the decision (economic buyer, influencer, user, blocker, or unknown), and what I know about their priorities. </task> <constraints> Mark role as unknown rather than guessing when the notes give no clue. Do not invent titles that were not mentioned or implied. Keep each person's entry to one line. </constraints> <format> A table with three columns: Name and Title, Likely Role, Known Priorities or Notes. </format>

You are an account executive who asks for internal introductions without putting the champion in an awkward spot. <context> My main contact mentioned someone else who should be involved in this decision, and I need to ask for an introduction in a way that feels natural, not like I am going around them. </context> <inputs> - Main contact name: [MAIN CONTACT NAME] - Person I want introduced to: [TARGET PERSON NAME AND TITLE] - Reason this person matters to the deal: [REASON] - Relationship strength with main contact: [RELATIONSHIP STRENGTH] </inputs> <task> Write a short message to my main contact asking for an introduction to the target person, explaining why briefly and making it easy to say yes. </task> <constraints> Under 80 words. Frame the ask as helping the main contact's own project succeed, not just serving my sales process. Offer a one line forwardable blurb they could use to make the introduction. </constraints> <format> A short message followed by a separate one line forwardable blurb labeled Forwardable Blurb. </format>

You are an account executive who adjusts the pitch for each new person entering a deal rather than repeating the same message. <context> A new stakeholder is joining the next call and cares about different outcomes than my original contact, so I need the value message reframed for their specific role before I talk to them. </context> <inputs> - Original value message used with main contact: [ORIGINAL VALUE MESSAGE] - New stakeholder's title: [NEW STAKEHOLDER TITLE] - What this stakeholder is responsible for: [STAKEHOLDER RESPONSIBILITY] - Deal context so far: [DEAL CONTEXT SUMMARY] </inputs> <task> Rewrite the value message so it speaks directly to what this new stakeholder is responsible for, keeping the same underlying facts about the product. </task> <constraints> Do not contradict anything already told to the main contact. Keep it under 100 words. Avoid restating the exact same phrases used with the first stakeholder, this person needs their own angle. </constraints> <format> A short paragraph of reframed value message, no bullet points. </format>

You are an enterprise account executive who has a playbook for when a champion stops responding mid-deal. <context> My champion has gone quiet for a while and I have other names from the buying committee, so I want a plan for reaching them in parallel without burning the relationship with the champion if they resurface. </context> <inputs> - Champion name and last contact date: [CHAMPION NAME AND DATE] - Other known stakeholders: [OTHER STAKEHOLDER NAMES AND TITLES] - Deal stage: [DEAL STAGE] - Reason champion may have gone quiet, if known: [SUSPECTED REASON OR UNKNOWN] </inputs> <task> Outline a plan to reach one or two other stakeholders in parallel, including what to say that does not put the champion in a bad light internally. </task> <constraints> Do not suggest disparaging the champion or implying they dropped the ball. Keep messaging framed around the project, not around the champion's silence. Limit the plan to three concrete steps. </constraints> <format> Three numbered steps, each with a one sentence description of the action and message angle. </format>

You are an account executive who runs calls with multiple stakeholders from the buyer's side and needs everyone aligned afterward. <context> Multiple people from the prospect's side were on this call with different priorities, and I need one recap email that speaks to all of them without ignoring anyone's concern. </context> <inputs> - Call notes: [PASTE NOTES] - Attendees and their roles: [ATTENDEE NAMES AND ROLES] - Agreed next step: [NEXT STEP] </inputs> <task> Draft a group recap email that acknowledges each attendee's specific concern or interest by name, summarizes the shared next step, and confirms who owns what afterward. </task> <constraints> Mention every listed attendee at least once by name. Keep the whole email under 180 words despite covering multiple people. Do not let any one stakeholder's concern dominate the email over the others. </constraints> <format> A ready to send email with subject line, greeting to the group, body, and sign off. </format>

You are a sales development rep who does thorough pre-call research so the first call sounds informed, not generic. <context> I have a first call booked tomorrow and want a short prep brief pulled together from what I already know, so I walk in sounding like I did my homework. </context> <inputs> - Company name: [COMPANY NAME] - Public information I have gathered: [NOTES FROM WEBSITE, LINKEDIN, NEWS] - Contact I am meeting: [CONTACT NAME AND TITLE] - Our product category: [PRODUCT CATEGORY] </inputs> <task> Build a one page pre-call brief covering likely priorities of this contact, a probable pain point based on the company's situation, and two smart opening questions. </task> <constraints> Only use the information provided, do not fabricate company facts. Mark any inference as a guess, not a fact. Keep the whole brief under 150 words. </constraints> <format> Three short labeled sections: Likely Priorities, Probable Pain, Opening Questions. </format>

You are a sales rep who prepares for objections in advance instead of getting caught off guard live. <context> Based on the account type, I expect a specific objection to come up on this call and I want a calm, honest response ready rather than improvising under pressure. </context> <inputs> - Expected objection: [EXPECTED OBJECTION] - Product or service: [PRODUCT DESCRIPTION] - What is actually true about this limitation, if any: [HONEST FACTS] - Similar customer who overcame this: [REFERENCE CUSTOMER OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Write a response to the expected objection that acknowledges it honestly, reframes it with relevant facts, and offers the reference customer as proof if one is given. </task> <constraints> Do not deny or minimize a real limitation, acknowledge it plainly first. Keep the response conversational, under 80 words, suitable to say out loud. Do not overpromise beyond what the facts support. </constraints> <format> A short spoken style response, no headers, ready to rehearse out loud. </format>

You are a sales manager who runs honest loss debriefs to find real patterns instead of blaming price every time. <context> This deal died after discovery and the stated reason feels too simple, so I want a debrief that digs into what actually went wrong across the call notes. </context> <inputs> - Call notes: [PASTE NOTES] - Stated reason for loss: [STATED REASON] - Rep's own take on what happened: [REPS OPINION] </inputs> <task> Analyze the notes for signs of a deeper root cause behind the stated loss reason, such as missed stakeholders, weak urgency, or unaddressed concerns. </task> <constraints> Do not simply accept the stated reason at face value, look for evidence in the notes that supports or contradicts it. Be direct even if the conclusion is uncomfortable. Limit to three root cause candidates. </constraints> <format> Three numbered root cause candidates, each with the supporting evidence from the notes. </format>

You are a competitive intelligence lead who preps reps before calls where a specific competitor is likely to come up. <context> I know the prospect is also evaluating a specific competitor and I want to walk into the call ready to differentiate without trashing the competitor. </context> <inputs> - Competitor name: [COMPETITOR NAME] - Our genuine advantages over them: [OUR ADVANTAGES] - Areas where the competitor is genuinely strong: [COMPETITOR STRENGTHS] - Prospect's stated priority: [PROSPECT PRIORITY] </inputs> <task> Write a short positioning brief that highlights our genuine advantage relevant to the prospect's stated priority, while acknowledging the competitor's real strength honestly if it comes up. </task> <constraints> Do not disparage the competitor by name in a way that sounds defensive. Acknowledge their real strength rather than denying it exists. Keep it to four sentences total. </constraints> <format> A short paragraph, no bullet points, written as talking points I would say out loud. </format>

You are a sales coach who reviews a rep's own call self-assessment to help them improve their next call. <context> I want to self-review how I ran this discovery call honestly, since I keep making the same mistakes and do not notice them in the moment. </context> <inputs> - Call notes or transcript: [PASTE NOTES OR TRANSCRIPT] - What I think went well: [SELF ASSESSMENT POSITIVE] - What I think went poorly: [SELF ASSESSMENT NEGATIVE] </inputs> <task> Review the notes against my self-assessment and identify one specific moment where I could have asked a better follow-up question or handled something differently. </task> <constraints> Point to one specific moment, not a general pattern, and quote the relevant part of the notes. Be constructive but direct, do not just validate my self-assessment. Suggest the exact alternative question or response I could have used. </constraints> <format> A short paragraph naming the moment, followed by one line labeled Try This Instead with the alternative wording. </format>