Claude Prompts for Essays

You are a professional copy editor. Line-edit and proofread my essay. <context>Here is my draft: [paste text]. Level: [high school, undergrad, grad]. Citation style if relevant: [style]. What I want prioritized: [grammar, clarity, style, all].</context> <task>Correct grammar, spelling, punctuation, and awkward phrasing at the sentence level, and return a clean corrected version alongside a summary of the types of errors you fixed.</task> <constraints>Preserve my meaning, argument, and voice — edit, don't rewrite. Fix mechanics and clarity without changing my ideas or over-formalizing. Keep track of recurring error patterns so I can learn. Do not add new content or citations.</constraints> <format>The Corrected Text (clean, ready to use), then an 'Edits Summary' grouping the changes by type (grammar, punctuation, word choice, clarity) with 1-2 examples each, and a 'recurring pattern to watch' note so I stop repeating mistakes.</format>

You are an editor who makes academic writing clear and concise. Tighten my writing. <context>Here is my text: [paste text]. Level/tone: [level]. Concern: [wordy, dense, unclear, passive]. Any length target: [word count if trimming].</context> <task>Rewrite the passage for clarity and concision: cut redundancy, replace jargon and inflated phrasing with plain words, fix passive constructions where active is stronger, and preserve the meaning.</task> <constraints>Keep my argument and academic register intact — clearer, not dumbed down. Remove filler ('in order to', 'due to the fact that') and redundancy. Prefer strong verbs over nominalizations. Don't cut nuance or evidence. Show what changed.</constraints> <format>The Rewritten Passage, a before/after word count, and a short 'what I cut and why' list (redundancy, jargon, passive voice, wordiness) with 2-3 examples so I can apply the same edits elsewhere.</format>

You are an experienced writing instructor giving developmental feedback. Critique my essay. <context>Here is my essay: [paste text]. Assignment prompt: [what it should accomplish]. Level: [level]. Rubric or criteria if any: [criteria]. What I'm unsure about: [my concern].</context> <task>Give structured developmental feedback on thesis strength, argument and evidence, structure, clarity, and how well it answers the prompt — with specific, actionable suggestions, not just praise or blame.</task> <constraints>Be honest but constructive. Prioritize the 2-3 highest-impact improvements over nitpicks. Point to specific passages, not vague generalities. Balance strengths with weaknesses. Give me next steps I can act on, not a grade. Don't rewrite it for me.</constraints> <format>Sections: Overall Impression (2-3 sentences), Strengths, Priority Improvements (ranked, each with the passage + a concrete fix), Prompt Alignment (does it answer the question?), and Top 3 Next Steps. Reference specific lines.</format>

You are a writing coach. Diagnose and strengthen a paragraph that isn't working. <context>The paragraph: [paste it]. Its intended point: [what I want it to argue]. The thesis it supports: [thesis]. What feels off: [weak, unclear, unsupported, rambling]. Level: [level].</context> <task>Diagnose why the paragraph is weak (unclear point, missing evidence, no analysis, poor structure), then rewrite it into a strong version and explain the changes.</task> <constraints>Keep my intended point and voice. Diagnose before fixing so I learn the problem. Add a clear topic sentence, integrate evidence with analysis, and link to the thesis. If it's missing evidence, mark where I need to add it rather than inventing facts.</constraints> <format>A short Diagnosis (what's weak and why), the Strengthened Paragraph, a bracketed [add evidence here] marker if support is missing, and a 2-line 'what I changed' explanation. Do not fabricate sources or data.</format>

You are an editor skilled at hitting exact word counts without losing substance. Resize my essay. <context>Here is my text: [paste it]. Current length: [words]. Target length: [target words]. Direction: [trim down / expand up]. What must stay: [key arguments/evidence]. Level: [level].</context> <task>Rewrite the essay to hit the target word count — trimming redundancy and low-value content if shortening, or deepening analysis and adding relevant support if lengthening — while keeping the argument intact.</task> <constraints>Hit within 5% of the target. When trimming, cut filler and repetition first, never core arguments or evidence. When expanding, add genuine analysis or examples, not padding or repetition. Preserve structure, flow, and voice. Report the final count.</constraints> <format>The Resized Essay, the final word count, and a short note on what was cut or added (and why) so the changes are transparent. If expanding, mark any [add a source/example here] spots rather than fabricating evidence.</format>

You are a creative nonfiction coach. Draft a narrative personal essay. <context>The experience/story: [what happened]. The deeper meaning or insight: [what it taught me / theme]. Audience/purpose: [college app, class, personal]. Tone: [reflective, honest, vivid]. Length: [word count].</context> <task>Write a narrative essay that tells the story with vivid scene-setting, a clear arc (tension → turning point → resolution), and reflection that connects the experience to a larger insight.</task> <constraints>Show through specific sensory detail and scene, don't just tell. Build a genuine arc with a turning point. Weave reflection in, don't tack a moral on the end. Keep an authentic first-person voice. Avoid clichés and over-sentimentality.</constraints> <format>The narrative essay with an engaging opening scene, the story arc, and reflective insight. After it, a short note on where the 'show don't tell' moments and the thematic turn occur, so I can strengthen my own draft.</format>

You are a descriptive writing coach. Draft a descriptive essay. <context>Subject to describe: [person, place, object, experience]. The dominant impression I want to create: [mood/feeling]. Key sensory details I've noticed: [sights, sounds, smells, textures]. Purpose: [class, portfolio]. Length: [word count].</context> <task>Write a descriptive essay that immerses the reader through vivid sensory language, organized spatially or by impression, all reinforcing one dominant mood.</task> <constraints>Engage multiple senses, not just sight. Use precise, concrete nouns and strong verbs over adjective pileups. Every detail should serve the dominant impression. Organize logically (spatial, chronological, or by significance). Show, don't explain the feeling.</constraints> <format>The descriptive essay, then a labeled list of the sensory details used (by sense) and a one-line note on the dominant impression, so I can see how the technique creates the mood.</format>

You are an expository writing instructor. Draft an expository essay that explains a topic clearly. <context>Topic to explain: [subject]. Audience knowledge level: [beginner, general, informed]. Key points to cover: [subtopics/facts]. Purpose: [inform, define, explain a process, analyze cause/effect]. Length: [word count]. Level: [level].</context> <task>Write an expository essay that explains the topic objectively and logically: a clear thesis stating what will be explained, organized body sections, and neutral, evidence-based explanation.</task> <constraints>Stay objective — inform, don't persuade or opine. Organize logically for the type (chronological, cause-effect, classification). Define terms for the audience level. Use clear examples. Base claims on the facts I provide; flag where a source is needed rather than inventing data.</constraints> <format>The expository essay with a clear thesis, logically ordered sections with headings if helpful, and neutral explanation. Mark any [cite a source here] spots where a factual claim needs support. Do not fabricate statistics.</format>

You are a writing instructor. Draft a compare-and-contrast essay. <context>The two subjects: [A and B]. Basis for comparison: [why compare them]. Points of comparison: [criteria — e.g. cost, impact, method]. My thesis/angle: [what the comparison reveals]. Structure preference: [block or point-by-point]. Length: [words]. Level: [level].</context> <task>Write a compare-and-contrast essay with a thesis that makes a point (not just 'they're similar and different'), organized clearly, covering the chosen criteria evenly for both subjects.</task> <constraints>The thesis must argue something the comparison reveals. Treat both subjects with equal depth across the same criteria. Use the requested structure (block or point-by-point) consistently. Use clear comparative transitions. Avoid a mechanical list — build toward the insight.</constraints> <format>The essay using the chosen structure, with a purposeful thesis, balanced coverage of each criterion, and a conclusion stating what the comparison reveals. Add a quick comparison table of the criteria as a planning aid.</format>

You are a reflective writing coach. Draft a reflective essay. <context>Experience/learning to reflect on: [event, course, project, reading]. What I did/observed: [details]. What I felt and thought: [reactions]. What I learned or how I changed: [growth]. Framework if required: [Gibbs, DEAL, none]. Length: [words]. Level: [level].</context> <task>Write a reflective essay that describes the experience, analyzes my response and what shaped it, and articulates the learning and how I'll apply it going forward.</task> <constraints>Balance description with genuine analysis — reflection is about meaning, not just recounting. Be honest, including struggles or missteps. Move from concrete experience to insight to future application. If a framework is named, follow its stages. Keep an authentic first-person voice.</constraints> <format>The reflective essay moving through description → analysis → learning → future application (following the named framework if any). Add a short note labeling where each reflective stage occurs so I can check the depth of my own version.</format>

You are an academic writing advisor. Help me draft a structured argumentative research paper. <context>Research question: [question]. Thesis: [my argued position]. Field: [discipline]. Key sources and their findings: [list — provide real sources you've read]. Citation style: [APA/MLA/Chicago]. Length/level: [detail].</context> <task>Draft a research paper structure with content: introduction with thesis, a background/literature section, the argument developed over evidence-based body sections, counterargument, and conclusion — using only my provided sources.</task> <constraints>Build every claim on the sources I supply — do NOT invent sources, quotes, or data. Integrate evidence with proper in-text citations in the named style. Maintain a formal academic register. Address a counterargument. Keep the thesis central throughout.</constraints> <format>A full draft with sections: Introduction (context + thesis), Literature/Background, Argument (2-4 evidence-based sections with in-text citations), Counterargument & Rebuttal, Conclusion. Mark [need a source here] anywhere a claim lacks support. Do not fabricate references.</format>

You are a literature professor. Help me draft a literary analysis essay. <context>Text: [title, author]. Focus: [theme, character, symbol, device, passage]. My interpretive claim: [my thesis about the text]. Key quotes/passages: [textual evidence, with locations]. Level: [level]. Citation style: [MLA usually].</context> <task>Draft a literary analysis with an arguable interpretive thesis, body paragraphs that analyze specific textual evidence (close reading), and a conclusion that reflects on the meaning.</task> <constraints>Argue an interpretation, don't summarize the plot. Anchor every point in specific quotes and analyze the language/devices, not just what happens. Use present tense for the text. Integrate quotes with correct MLA in-text citations. Use only quotes I provide or clearly mark [insert quote].</constraints> <format>The essay with an interpretive thesis, close-reading body paragraphs (each: claim → quote → analysis of technique → link), and a reflective conclusion. Mark [insert supporting quote] where I need to add textual evidence. No plot-summary padding.</format>

You are a science writing instructor. Help me write a structured lab report. <context>Experiment/title: [what was tested]. Hypothesis: [my prediction]. Method: [what I did — materials, procedure]. Results/data: [my observations and measurements]. Field: [biology, chemistry, physics]. Format required: [IMRaD or specific sections]. Level: [level].</context> <task>Draft a lab report in scientific format: introduction with hypothesis, methods, results (describing my data objectively), and discussion interpreting the findings and evaluating the hypothesis.</task> <constraints>Use my actual data and observations — do not invent results or measurements. Write methods in past tense, passive where conventional. Report results objectively (interpretation goes in discussion). In discussion, evaluate the hypothesis, address error sources, and stay evidence-based. Formal scientific register.</constraints> <format>Sections: Introduction (background + hypothesis), Methods, Results (describe data; note where a table/figure goes), Discussion (interpretation, hypothesis evaluation, error analysis), Conclusion. Mark [insert your data/figure] where my specific numbers belong. Never fabricate data.</format>

You are a business/academic case analysis coach. Help me write a case study analysis. <context>The case: [name/scenario and key facts]. Field: [business, law, medicine, social science]. The central problem or question: [what to analyze/decide]. Frameworks to apply: [SWOT, Porter, PESTEL, or discipline-specific]. Relevant data from the case: [facts]. Length/level: [detail].</context> <task>Draft a case study analysis: a summary of the situation, identification of the core problem, analysis using the relevant framework, evaluation of options, and a justified recommendation.</task> <constraints>Base the analysis strictly on the case facts I provide — don't invent details. Apply the framework rigorously, not superficially. Evaluate multiple options with trade-offs before recommending. Justify the recommendation with reasoning tied to the analysis. Keep it structured and evidence-based.</constraints> <format>Sections: Situation Summary, Problem Statement, Analysis (using the named framework, in a table where useful), Options & Trade-offs, Recommendation (with justification), and Implementation notes. Reference specific case facts throughout.</format>

You are an academic editor. Write an abstract and format the front matter for my paper. <context>Paper title: [title]. Field: [discipline]. The paper's purpose/question: [aim]. Method: [approach]. Key findings/argument: [results]. Conclusion/implication: [takeaway]. Abstract type: [descriptive or structured]. Style: [APA/MLA/Chicago]. Word limit: [limit].</context> <task>Write a concise abstract summarizing purpose, method, findings, and conclusion, plus suggest keywords and show the correct title-page/heading formatting for the named style.</task> <constraints>Keep the abstract within the word limit and self-contained (no citations, no undefined jargon). Cover purpose → method → results → implication in that order. Base it only on what I provide. Format the title page and headings exactly per the style edition. Suggest 4-6 relevant keywords.</constraints> <format>The Abstract (within word limit), a Keywords line (4-6 terms), and a Formatting Guide showing the correct title page layout, running head (if any), and heading levels for the named style. Note the abstract's word count.</format>