50 Claude Prompts That Run Your Freelance Business

You are a delivery lead who converts vague client briefs into defined scopes. <context> A client has described what they want in a rambling call or email and I need a clear scope before I price anything. </context> <inputs> - The client's brief in their own words: [PASTE] - What I think they actually need: [MY READ] - My service and typical process: [DESCRIBE] - Known constraints: [DEADLINE, BUDGET HINT, THEIR TEAM'S CAPACITY, ACCESS] - Anything they said that contradicts itself: [NOTES] - Deliverable formats I would produce: [LIST] </inputs> <task> Produce a scope document: the objective in one sentence, in-scope deliverables listed specifically, an explicit out-of-scope list, the assumptions the scope depends on, what I need from the client and by when, and the phase structure. Then list the eight questions that must be answered before this scope can be priced, ordered by how much each one moves the price. </task> <constraints> - The out-of-scope list must name the things this client will most likely assume are included. - Every assumption must be written so it can be confirmed or corrected in one line. - Do not invent requirements the client did not express; mark inferences as questions. </constraints> <format> Return the scope document as an artifact, then the eight pricing questions ranked by impact. </format>

You are an estimating specialist for independent service providers. <context> I need to give a client a number, and I want the estimate structured so that the assumptions behind it are visible and revisions are chargeable. </context> <inputs> - Deliverables and their rough size: [LIST] - My rate or day rate: [FIGURE] - My honest effort estimate per deliverable: [HOURS OR DAYS] - Dependencies on the client: [ASSETS, APPROVALS, ACCESS, SIGN-OFFS] - Timeline requested: [DATES] - Revision rounds I want to include: [NUMBER] </inputs> <task> Build the estimate: a line-item table with effort and price per deliverable, a contingency line with its reasoning, the total, the assumptions the number depends on, an explicit exclusions list, the client dependencies with dates, and the terms covering revisions and change requests. Then flag the two line items most likely to overrun and why. </task> <constraints> - Show contingency as its own visible line rather than hiding it in the rates. - State exactly what happens when a client dependency slips, in one sentence. - Do not pad silently; if my effort estimate looks low, say so and explain where. </constraints> <format> Return the estimate as a clean document artifact, then the two overrun risks, then the sentence to say when presenting the number. </format>

You are a project planner who builds realistic schedules for solo delivery. <context> I am the only person delivering this and I need a timeline that survives client review cycles and my other commitments. </context> <inputs> - Deliverables and dependencies between them: [LIST] - My available days per week for this project: [NUMBER] - Other commitments in the period: [DESCRIBE] - Client review turnaround, realistically: [DAYS] - Hard deadline and what drives it: [DATE AND REASON] - Approval steps needed and who signs off: [DETAILS] </inputs> <task> Build a milestone plan: phases with start and end dates, my working days versus client review days shown separately, milestones tied to payment triggers, the critical path, and the two points where a slow client review breaks the deadline. Then propose a compressed version and say exactly what has to be sacrificed for it. </task> <constraints> - Model client review time as elapsed calendar days, not as instant. - Do not schedule me at full capacity; leave slack and label it. - Tie at least two milestones to payment triggers. </constraints> <format> Return the milestone table with dates and payment triggers, the critical path note, the two break points, then the compressed alternative with its sacrifice. </format>

You are an estimating auditor who reviews effort figures before they are quoted. <context> I habitually underestimate, and I want my numbers challenged before I send them to a client rather than discovered mid-project. </context> <inputs> - My estimate per task: [LIST WITH HOURS OR DAYS] - Similar past projects and what they actually took: [DETAILS] - What I forgot to include last time: [HONEST LIST] - Unfamiliar elements in this project: [LIST] - Client characteristics: [DECISIVE, SLOW, MANY STAKEHOLDERS, FIRST TIME BUYER] - Admin and communication time I usually leave out: [ESTIMATE] </inputs> <task> Challenge each estimate against my own history. Flag every task that looks optimistic and say why, add the invisible work I have omitted such as calls, revisions, handover, and setup, apply a risk factor to unfamiliar items with reasoning, and produce a revised total. Show the gap between my original and the revised figure as a percentage. </task> <constraints> - Use my past actuals as the benchmark, not general industry rules. - List invisible work as explicit line items rather than a blanket uplift. - Say plainly if the revised total makes this project unattractive at my rate. </constraints> <format> Return the task-by-task challenge, the added invisible work, the revised total with the percentage gap, then the one task most likely to blow up. </format>

You are a pricing adviser for independent professionals. <context> I need to decide whether to quote this project as a fixed fee, hourly, or day rate, and I keep defaulting to whichever I used last time. </context> <inputs> - Project description and deliverables: [DETAILS] - How well defined the scope is: [TIGHT, LOOSE, UNKNOWN] - Client behaviour and decisiveness: [DESCRIBE] - My effort estimate and confidence in it: [FIGURE PLUS CONFIDENCE] - My rate and target for this project: [FIGURES] - What the client seems to expect: [DESCRIBE] </inputs> <task> Assess which pricing model fits: score fixed fee, hourly, day rate, and a hybrid against scope clarity, overrun risk, client behaviour, and my cash flow. Recommend one with reasoning, show what the quote looks like under that model, and name the two protective terms I need for it. Then give the sentence explaining the model to the client in a way they will find reasonable. </task> <constraints> - Tie the recommendation directly to scope clarity and overrun risk, not to preference. - Name the specific protective terms each model requires, such as caps, change orders, or minimum blocks. - Say when the honest answer is to refuse a fixed fee on this scope. </constraints> <format> Return the scored comparison, the recommendation with reasoning, the quote shape, the protective terms, then the client-facing explanation. </format>

You are a delivery manager who handles change control on small engagements. <context> A client has asked for something outside what we agreed, and I need to reprice it professionally instead of absorbing it. </context> <inputs> - What was agreed originally: [SCOPE SUMMARY] - What they are now asking for: [PASTE THEIR REQUEST] - Effort the change adds: [HOURS OR DAYS] - Knock-on effects: [TIMELINE, OTHER DELIVERABLES, REWORK] - My rate and any change-order terms already agreed: [DETAILS] - Relationship value and whether I want more work here: [DESCRIBE] </inputs> <task> Assess the change: whether it is genuinely out of scope, quoting the original scope language, the added effort and its knock-on cost, and three response options, absorb it, reprice it, or trade it against something in scope. Recommend one. Then write the client message that presents the change order without friction, and a version for when the change is small enough to gift with a note. </task> <constraints> - Quote the original scope wording when judging in or out of scope. - The client message must be matter of fact, never aggrieved. - If absorbing is the right commercial call, say so and explain how to log it anyway. </constraints> <format> Return the in-or-out-of-scope judgment, the cost of the change, the three options with a recommendation, then both client messages. </format>

You are a requirements specialist who defines what done means on client projects. <context> My projects drag because there is no agreed definition of finished, so revisions continue indefinitely. </context> <inputs> - Deliverables in this project: [LIST] - Formats and where each will be delivered: [DETAILS] - Who accepts each deliverable: [NAMES OR ROLES] - Quality standards that matter to the client: [DESCRIBE] - Revision rounds included: [NUMBER] - Past disputes about done on similar work: [EXAMPLES] </inputs> <task> For each deliverable, write acceptance criteria that are objectively checkable, the format and delivery method, the named accepter, the review window in days, and what happens if no response arrives inside that window. Add the revision policy stating what counts as a revision versus a new request, and a deemed-acceptance clause in plain language. </task> <constraints> - Criteria must be checkable by someone else, not matters of taste; where taste is unavoidable, define the approver and the rounds. - Include a review window with a default outcome for silence. - Plain language throughout; this is a working agreement, not a legal document, and a lawyer should review anything contractual. </constraints> <format> Return a deliverable table with criteria, accepter, and review window, then the revision policy, then the deemed-acceptance wording. </format>

You are a risk manager who adapts formal risk practice to solo projects. <context> I want a short list of what could realistically go wrong on this project and what I would do about each, without building corporate paperwork. </context> <inputs> - Project and its deliverables: [DESCRIBE] - Dependencies on the client: [ASSETS, ACCESS, APPROVALS, THIRD PARTIES] - Technical or creative unknowns: [LIST] - Client characteristics and history: [DESCRIBE] - My own constraints: [CAPACITY, TRAVEL, OTHER PROJECTS, HEALTH] - What went wrong on similar projects: [EXAMPLES] </inputs> <task> Build a register of the eight most likely risks with, for each: the trigger to watch for, likelihood, impact on time and money, the mitigation I take now, and the contingency if it happens. Rank by expected cost. Then name the two risks worth writing into the agreement and the one early warning signal I should check weekly. </task> <constraints> - Only risks specific to this project and client; no generic entries. - Mitigations must be actions I can take this week, not intentions. - Rank by likelihood times impact and show the reasoning. </constraints> <format> Return the ranked register table, the two risks to write into the agreement, then the weekly warning signal. </format>

You are a pricing strategist who structures multi-option quotes. <context> I want to give the client a choice of scope and price rather than one number they can only accept or reject. </context> <inputs> - What the client asked for: [DESCRIBE] - My full recommended approach: [DELIVERABLES] - The minimum version that still works: [DELIVERABLES] - Budget signal from the client: [FIGURE OR HINT] - My rate and capacity: [FIGURES] - The outcome the client actually cares about: [DESCRIBE] </inputs> <task> Build three tiers: a lean option that achieves the core outcome, a recommended option, and an extended option. For each give the name, the deliverables, the effort, the price, the outcome it produces, and who it suits. Design the middle tier to be the obvious choice. Then write the one-paragraph framing that presents the tiers and the line that guides them to the recommended one. </task> <constraints> - Every tier must deliver a real outcome; no deliberately crippled option. - Tier names describe the outcome, not the size. - State the tradeoff of the lean option plainly rather than hiding it. </constraints> <format> Return the three-tier comparison table, the framing paragraph, then the recommendation line and one note on which tier clients like mine usually pick. </format>

You are a delivery consultant who reshapes projects to fit real budgets. <context> The client wants my full scope but has less money than it costs, and I would rather reshape the work than discount my rate. </context> <inputs> - Full scope and its price: [DETAILS AND FIGURE] - Client's stated budget: [FIGURE] - The outcome they actually need: [DESCRIBE] - Deliverables ranked by contribution to that outcome: [MY VIEW] - What their team could do themselves: [CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT] - My rate floor: [FIGURE] </inputs> <task> Build a reduced scope that fits the budget without cutting my rate: which deliverables to remove, which to simplify, which to hand to their team with guidance, and what to defer to a later phase. Show the price, what they lose, and the risk each cut introduces. Then write the message that presents it as a deliberate plan rather than a discount, plus the phase-two outline. </task> <constraints> - Never reduce the rate; reduce the scope and say so explicitly. - Attach the specific risk to each cut so the client makes an informed choice. - Include the handover guidance needed for anything their team takes on. </constraints> <format> Return the reduced scope with price and risks, the client message, then the phase-two outline with its trigger. </format>

You are a financial adviser who calculates minimum viable rates for self-employed people. <context> I picked my rate by guessing what sounded normal and I want to know the number below which I am actually losing money. </context> <inputs> - Target annual income after business costs: [FIGURE] - Business costs per year: [SOFTWARE, INSURANCE, ACCOUNTING, EQUIPMENT, WORKSPACE, TRAINING] - Weeks I want to work per year: [NUMBER AFTER HOLIDAY AND SICK ALLOWANCE] - Billable hours per working week, honestly: [NUMBER] - Non-billable time: [SALES, ADMIN, MARKETING, LEARNING HOURS PER WEEK] - Pension, tax reserve, and buffer targets: [PERCENTAGES OR FIGURES] </inputs> <task> Calculate my rate floor and show every step: total revenue required, effective billable hours per year after non-billable time and unpaid weeks, the resulting hourly floor, and the equivalent day and week rates. Then show what happens to the floor at three utilisation levels, and state how far my current rate sits above or below it. </task> <constraints> - Use honest billable hours; a 40 hour week is almost never 40 billable hours. - Show the arithmetic at every step so I can change one input and follow the effect. - Treat tax as a reserve percentage, flag it as an estimate, and recommend confirming with an accountant. </constraints> <format> Return the calculation step by step, the floor as hourly, daily, and weekly rates, the three utilisation scenarios, then the gap against my current rate. </format>

You are a client communications specialist who handles price increases for service providers. <context> I am raising my rates and I need to tell existing clients in a way that keeps the good ones and does not invite negotiation. </context> <inputs> - Current and new rate: [FIGURES] - Increase percentage: [NUMBER] - Effective date and notice period: [DATES] - Client list with tenure, volume, and profitability: [DETAILS] - What has improved in what I deliver: [SPECIFICS] - Which clients I can afford to lose: [HONEST LIST] </inputs> <task> Write the increase notice: a clear opening stating the new rate and date, a short and non-defensive reason, what stays the same or improves, and a line that makes continuing easy. Then produce three variants, one for long-standing high-value clients with a transition period, one for standard clients, and one for low-margin clients where I would accept a departure. Add the reply for a client who pushes back. </task> <constraints> - State the new number in the first two sentences; do not bury it. - One line of reasoning only; long justifications invite negotiation. - No apology and no hedging language anywhere in the notice. </constraints> <format> Return the three variants with subject lines, the pushback reply, then the sequence and timing for sending them. </format>

You are a pricing consultant who moves service providers from time-based to value-based pricing. <context> This project is worth far more to the client than the hours it will take me, and I want to price and justify it on the value rather than the time. </context> <inputs> - The project and the outcome it produces: [DESCRIBE] - The client's economics: [REVENUE SCALE, MARGIN, COST OF THE PROBLEM] - Quantified value of the outcome: [REVENUE GAINED, COST SAVED, RISK REMOVED] - My effort: [HOURS OR DAYS] - What a time-based quote would be: [FIGURE] - Their alternatives: [AGENCY, IN-HOUSE HIRE, DO NOTHING] </inputs> <task> Build the value case: quantify the outcome with visible arithmetic, price the project as a defensible share of that value, compare it against the client's alternatives including doing nothing, and produce the two or three sentences that justify the number without mentioning hours. Then name the three objections this pricing invites and my answer to each. </task> <constraints> - Show the value arithmetic and label every assumption; unsupported value claims collapse under one question. - Never mention hours or day rates in the client-facing justification. - Be honest if the value case is too weak to support value pricing here. </constraints> <format> Return the value calculation, the recommended price with its share of value, the alternatives comparison, the justification lines, then the three objections with answers. </format>

You are a business model consultant who designs retainers for independent providers. <context> I want predictable monthly revenue instead of hunting for projects, and I need a retainer that is fair to both sides and does not turn into unlimited access. </context> <inputs> - Services suited to ongoing work: [LIST] - A client who might buy this: [DESCRIBE THEIR ONGOING NEED] - Monthly capacity I can commit: [HOURS OR DAYS] - My rate and the retainer discount I would accept: [FIGURES] - Response times I can genuinely hold: [DETAILS] - What must be excluded to stop scope creep: [LIST] </inputs> <task> Design two or three retainer tiers with: a name, the included scope, the monthly hours or deliverables, response time commitments, exclusions, the price, and the minimum term. Add the rollover and overage rules, the review cadence, and the notice period. Then write the one-page proposal that presents it, and name the two clauses that protect me from unlimited access. </task> <constraints> - Every tier needs explicit exclusions and an overage rule; open-ended retainers always lose money. - Response time commitments must be ones I can hold on my worst week. - Cap rollover of unused hours and say why in one line. </constraints> <format> Return the tier comparison table, the rules on rollover, overage, review and notice, the one-page proposal, then the two protective clauses. </format>

You are a commercial adviser who models pricing structures for independents. <context> The same piece of work can be sold as days or as a project fee, and I want to see which leaves me better off given how this project will actually run. </context> <inputs> - Project scope and my effort estimate: [DETAILS] - My day rate: [FIGURE] - The project fee I would quote: [FIGURE] - Overrun probability and likely size: [ESTIMATE] - How this client behaves: [DECISIVE, SLOW, MANY REVISIONS] - My cash flow needs and payment timing preference: [DESCRIBE] </inputs> <task> Model both structures: expected revenue, revenue if the project overruns by 20 and 40 percent, effective hourly rate in each case, admin overhead, cash flow timing, and who carries the risk. State which structure wins under my overrun probability and what the break-even overrun is. Then name the terms that make the weaker structure acceptable. </task> <constraints> - Model the overrun cases explicitly; the flat case is not the decision-relevant one. - Show effective hourly rate for every scenario. - State the break-even overrun as a specific percentage. </constraints> <format> Return the scenario comparison table, the break-even overrun percentage, the recommendation, then the protective terms for the alternative. </format>

You are an operations consultant who writes commercial policies for solo businesses. <context> Clients ask for urgent turnarounds and weekend work and I keep saying yes for free. I want a written policy so it becomes a normal commercial conversation. </context> <inputs> - My standard turnaround and working hours: [DETAILS] - Types of urgent request I get: [EXAMPLES] - How often, and from which clients: [NOTES] - What rushing actually costs me: [DISPLACED WORK, EVENINGS, QUALITY RISK] - Surcharge levels I would consider: [PERCENTAGES] - Clients I would apply this to first: [LIST] </inputs> <task> Write the policy: standard turnaround definition, what qualifies as rush, out-of-hours and weekend definitions, the surcharge for each with a plain reason, the approval process before rush work starts, and the exceptions I choose to grant. Then write the client-facing summary paragraph and the message that introduces the policy to existing clients. </task> <constraints> - Define rush by an objective trigger such as a turnaround window, not by how it feels. - Require explicit approval of the surcharge before work starts, in writing. - Keep the client-facing version short and unapologetic. </constraints> <format> Return the internal policy, the client-facing summary, the introduction message, then the line to say when a client pushes back on a surcharge. </format>

You are a negotiation coach who trains service providers to hold their price. <context> A client has asked me to lower my price and I want responses that hold the number or trade the discount for something real. </context> <inputs> - My quote and what they asked for: [FIGURES] - Exact words they used: [QUOTE] - How much I want this client: [HONEST ANSWER] - My rate floor for this work: [FIGURE] - Things I would trade for a lower price: [SCOPE CUT, LONGER TIMELINE, UPFRONT PAYMENT, CASE STUDY, REFERRAL, BULK COMMITMENT] - My current capacity: [BUSY OR OPEN] </inputs> <task> Write five responses: hold the price with a value restatement, trade the discount for a scope cut, trade it for better payment terms, trade it for a commitment or case study, and a warm decline that keeps the relationship. For each, note what it signals and the likely reply. Then recommend the order to use them in and the point at which I should walk. </task> <constraints> - Never lower the price without removing something; a plain discount reprices all my future work with this client. - Keep each response to two or three sentences, comfortable to say out loud. - Include the walk-away point as a specific figure or condition. </constraints> <format> Return the five responses with their signal and likely reply, the recommended order, then the walk-away condition. </format>

You are a commercial adviser who works with freelancers selling across borders. <context> I am quoting a client in another country and currency, and I need my number to survive exchange rates, fees, and payment delays. </context> <inputs> - My home currency and rate: [DETAILS] - Client's country and currency: [DETAILS] - Payment method they propose: [BANK TRANSFER, PLATFORM, CARD] - Known fees and spread: [FIGURES OR UNKNOWN] - Payment terms proposed: [DAYS] - Project duration and value: [DETAILS] </inputs> <task> Calculate what I actually receive after conversion, fees, and platform charges, and what an adverse rate move of 5 and 10 percent over the payment period would cost me. Recommend the currency to quote in, the buffer to build in, and the payment method that loses least. Then write the two contract lines covering currency, fees, and who bears conversion risk, and the sentence explaining it to the client. </task> <constraints> - Show the fee and conversion arithmetic line by line. - Model an adverse rate move rather than assuming today's rate holds. - Commercial guidance only; note that tax, invoicing rules, and withholding vary by country and need a local professional. </constraints> <format> Return the net-received calculation, the adverse-move scenarios, the recommended currency and method, the two contract lines, then the client explanation. </format>

You are a business planner who builds capacity plans for one-person businesses. <context> I have an annual income goal and no idea whether my current rate, pipeline, and capacity can actually produce it. </context> <inputs> - Annual revenue target: [FIGURE] - Current rate and typical project size: [FIGURES] - Projects or retainers already committed: [DETAILS AND VALUE] - Realistic billable days per month: [NUMBER] - My conversion rate from enquiry to signed work: [PERCENT OR ESTIMATE] - Current pipeline: [NUMBER OF LIVE CONVERSATIONS AND THEIR VALUE] </inputs> <task> Work backwards from the target: revenue needed per month, projects or retainer months required, enquiries needed at my conversion rate, and outreach volume needed to generate them. Compare that against my capacity and pipeline, then state whether the target is reachable, and if not, which single lever closes the gap most efficiently, rate, utilisation, project size, or conversion. </task> <constraints> - Show the funnel arithmetic at every stage so I can see where it breaks. - Test the plan against my stated billable days and flag any month that exceeds capacity. - Name one primary lever rather than recommending improvement everywhere. </constraints> <format> Return the backwards funnel calculation, the capacity check by month, the verdict on reachability, then the single highest-leverage change. </format>

You are a commercial designer who builds rate cards for independent professionals. <context> Every pricing conversation starts from zero and I want a rate card I can send that answers most questions before a call. </context> <inputs> - Services and my price for each: [LIST] - Packaged offers with prices: [LIST] - Retainer options: [DETAILS] - Minimum engagement: [FIGURE OR DURATION] - Payment terms, deposit, and revision policy: [DETAILS] - Surcharges and travel or expense policy: [DETAILS] </inputs> <task> Build a rate card document: a short positioning line, services grouped so buyers can find themselves quickly, prices or bands with what each includes, the packaged and retainer options, the standard terms covering deposits, payment days, revisions and surcharges, and a closing next step. Then produce a version with price bands rather than fixed figures for use early in a conversation. </task> <constraints> - Every price must state what is included and what is not. - Keep terms to plain one-line statements; this is a commercial document, not a contract. - Make the document skimmable in 30 seconds by a buyer who only wants a ballpark. </constraints> <format> Return the rate card as a clean document artifact, then the price-band version, then a note on when to send each. </format>

You are a commercial operations specialist who prepares client agreement checklists for freelancers. <context> I want to know which points my client agreements should cover before I send anything, so a lawyer review is quick and nothing obvious is missing. </context> <inputs> - My service and typical engagement: [DESCRIBE] - What I currently use: [NO CONTRACT, EMAIL CONFIRMATION, TEMPLATE, CLIENT'S PAPER] - Problems I have had before: [LATE PAYMENT, SCOPE CREEP, CANCELLED PROJECTS, OWNERSHIP DISPUTES] - Deliverable types and any third-party assets involved: [DETAILS] - Payment structure I want: [DEPOSIT, MILESTONES, TERMS] - Country I operate from: [FOR CONTEXT ONLY] </inputs> <task> Produce a checklist of the points a freelance agreement should address, grouped into scope and deliverables, money and timing, changes and cancellation, ownership and usage, confidentiality, liability and dependencies, and ending the engagement. For each point, explain in one plain line why it matters and what typically goes wrong without it. Then mark the five points most relevant to the problems I listed. </task> <constraints> - Explain purpose and risk only; do not draft binding clause wording. - State clearly that this is a preparation checklist and that a qualified lawyer in my jurisdiction should draft and review the actual agreement. - Prioritise the points against the problems I have actually experienced. </constraints> <format> Return the grouped checklist with a one-line purpose per point, the five prioritised points, then the questions to bring to a lawyer. </format>

You are a commercial reviewer who reads client-supplied contracts from the freelancer's side. <context> A client has sent me their standard agreement and I want to know what to question before I sign, in plain language. </context> <inputs> - The agreement text: [PASTE] - What we actually agreed commercially: [SCOPE, PRICE, TIMELINE] - My concerns: [PAYMENT TERMS, OWNERSHIP, EXCLUSIVITY, LIABILITY, TERMINATION] - Project value and duration: [FIGURES] - My leverage in this relationship: [DESCRIBE] - Country and whether the client is larger than me: [CONTEXT] </inputs> <task> Read the agreement and flag the terms that carry the most commercial risk to me: payment timing and conditions, unlimited revisions, ownership and moral rights, exclusivity or non-compete scope, indemnity and liability caps, termination rights, and anything that conflicts with what we agreed commercially. For each, quote the clause, explain the practical effect in one line, and suggest the change to request. Then rank them by whether they are must-fix, worth-asking, or acceptable. </task> <constraints> - Quote the clause text you are flagging; do not summarise it away. - Commercial reading only, not legal advice; state clearly which flags need a qualified lawyer before signing. - Rank realistically given my leverage rather than flagging everything as critical. </constraints> <format> Return the flagged clauses with quotes, practical effects, and requested changes, the must-fix ranking, then the email that raises them. </format>

You are a finance operations specialist who sets up invoicing for small service businesses. <context> My invoices are inconsistent and I get paid late, and I suspect the invoice itself is part of the problem. </context> <inputs> - What my current invoice includes: [DESCRIBE OR PASTE] - Payment terms I use now: [DAYS] - How clients pay: [BANK TRANSFER, CARD, PLATFORM] - Typical delay I experience: [DAYS] - Client types and their approval processes: [SMALL BUSINESS, ENTERPRISE PROCUREMENT, AGENCY] - Details clients have asked me to add: [PO NUMBER, REFERENCE, TAX FIELDS] </inputs> <task> Design my invoice template with every field that speeds payment: clear due date rather than terms only, itemised deliverables tied to the agreement, PO or reference field, payment methods with details, late payment note, and contact for queries. Then recommend the terms and cadence to use per client type, the day of the week and month to send, and the three changes most likely to shorten my payment delay. </task> <constraints> - Show an absolute due date, not just a terms label. - Match invoice line items to the agreed deliverable names so approvals do not stall. - Recommend terms per client type; enterprise procurement and small businesses behave differently. </constraints> <format> Return the invoice template as an artifact, the terms recommendation per client type, the send timing, then the three highest-impact changes. </format>

You are a credit control specialist who writes payment chase sequences for small businesses. <context> An invoice is overdue and I need a sequence that escalates properly without me having to invent the wording each time under stress. </context> <inputs> - Invoice details: [AMOUNT, NUMBER, DATE, DUE DATE, DAYS OVERDUE] - Client and contact: [NAMES, ROLES, WHO APPROVES PAYMENT] - What they have said so far: [QUOTES OR SILENCE] - Agreed terms including any late fee: [DETAILS] - Whether work is ongoing: [YES OR NO] - How much I value the relationship: [HONEST ANSWER] </inputs> <task> Write a five-stage ladder: a friendly nudge at a few days overdue, a firmer reminder restating terms, a message that escalates to a finance contact or the client's manager, a formal notice referencing the agreement and any late fee, and a final notice stating my next step. Give the timing for each and the internal note on what to do between stages. Then write the one-line message for chasing by phone or chat. </task> <constraints> - Escalate tone gradually; stage one must stay warm and assume an administrative slip. - Every stage states the amount, the invoice number, the due date, and one clear action. - Do not threaten any step I am not prepared to take, and note where legal advice would be needed before formal action. </constraints> <format> Return the five stages with timing and wording, the between-stage actions, then the phone or chat line. </format>

You are a commercial adviser who structures payment schedules for freelance work. <context> I want money before and during the work rather than all at the end, and I need to ask for that without sounding like I distrust the client. </context> <inputs> - Project value and duration: [FIGURES] - Deposit I want: [PERCENTAGE] - Natural milestones in the work: [LIST] - Client type and their payment process: [DESCRIBE] - My cash flow needs during the project: [DESCRIBE] - Any past experience with this client: [DETAILS] </inputs> <task> Design the payment schedule: deposit amount and what it secures, milestone payments tied to specific deliverables rather than dates, final payment and what triggers it, invoice timing for each, and what happens if a milestone slips because of the client. Then write the message that presents the schedule as standard practice, and the response for a client who wants to pay everything on completion. </task> <constraints> - Tie milestones to deliverables, not to calendar dates that a client delay can break. - Frame the deposit as scheduling and commitment, never as a trust issue. - Give a specific fallback for the pay-on-completion request rather than simply refusing. </constraints> <format> Return the payment schedule table, the presentation message, then the response to the pay-on-completion request. </format>

You are a commercial operations adviser who prepares cancellation terms for service providers. <context> A client cancelled a booked project once and I lost the whole month. I want cancellation terms prepared before it happens again. </context> <inputs> - How I book work and typical lead time: [DESCRIBE] - What a cancellation costs me: [DISPLACED WORK, REFUSED PROJECTS, PREPARATION DONE] - Project shapes I take: [FIXED PROJECTS, RETAINERS, BOOKED DAYS] - Cancellation experiences so far: [WHAT HAPPENED] - Terms I would consider fair: [SLIDING SCALE IDEAS] - Deposit practice: [CURRENT AND DESIRED] </inputs> <task> Design a cancellation framework: notice windows with the fee at each, what the deposit covers and whether it is refundable, how partial work is invoiced, postponement handled differently from cancellation, and the same terms applied from my side if I have to withdraw. Explain the commercial reasoning for each tier in one line, then write the plain-English client-facing summary. </task> <constraints> - Use a sliding scale tied to notice given, and justify each tier by the cost it covers. - Include my own obligations, not just the client's; one-sided terms invite pushback. - Commercial structure only; note that enforceability varies and a lawyer should review the wording. </constraints> <format> Return the notice-window fee table with reasoning, the deposit and postponement rules, the reciprocal terms, then the client-facing summary. </format>

You are a credit control trainer who coaches small business owners through collection calls. <context> Emails are being ignored and I need to call about an overdue invoice, which I find deeply uncomfortable. </context> <inputs> - Invoice details and days overdue: [DETAILS] - Who I am calling and their role: [NAME AND POSITION] - Emails already sent and any replies: [SUMMARY] - Whether work is paused or ongoing: [STATUS] - Outcome I want from the call: [PAYMENT DATE, ESCALATION, PAYMENT PLAN] - My relationship with this person: [DESCRIBE] </inputs> <task> Write the call script: an opening that is friendly and specific, the factual statement of the invoice and its status, the ask for a committed payment date, and branches for the four likely responses, it is in the system, the approver is away, we have a cash issue, and I will look into it. For each branch give my next line and the commitment to secure. End with the confirmation email to send within the hour. </task> <constraints> - Never apologise for calling about money owed. - Always leave with a specific date and a named person, not a promise to look into it. - Keep every line short and speakable; include the pauses where I should stop talking. </constraints> <format> Return the script with its branches, the commitment to secure in each, then the follow-up confirmation email. </format>

You are a credit control specialist who negotiates payment plans with struggling clients. <context> A client owes me across several invoices and says they cannot pay it all now. I want to recover the money without losing all of it. </context> <inputs> - All outstanding invoices: [NUMBERS, AMOUNTS, DATES, DAYS OVERDUE] - What the client has said about their situation: [QUOTES] - Total owed and what I could accept as a schedule: [FIGURES] - Whether work is ongoing or paused: [STATUS] - My own cash position and urgency: [DESCRIBE] - Signals about their viability: [HONEST ASSESSMENT] </inputs> <task> Produce a statement of account listing every invoice with its age and the running total. Then design a payment plan with instalment dates and amounts, a first payment that arrives quickly, a condition on resuming work, and what happens if an instalment is missed. Write the message that proposes it, and add my assessment of whether to agree a plan or stop the work and escalate. </task> <constraints> - Require a meaningful first payment before any work resumes. - Keep the plan short; long schedules with a struggling client rarely complete. - Be direct about the recovery risk and note when professional or legal advice is warranted. </constraints> <format> Return the statement of account table, the instalment plan, the proposal message, then the plan-versus-escalate assessment. </format>

You are a commercial adviser who handles work stoppage for non-payment. <context> I am still delivering while an invoice sits unpaid, and I need to pause professionally rather than either working for free or vanishing. </context> <inputs> - Overdue amount and age: [FIGURES AND DAYS] - Work in progress and what stopping affects: [DESCRIBE] - What our agreement says about payment and suspension: [QUOTE OR NONE] - Chase history: [WHAT I HAVE SENT AND ANY REPLIES] - Client dependencies on this work: [DEADLINES, LAUNCHES] - Whether I want to continue with this client: [HONEST ANSWER] </inputs> <task> Write the pause notice: a factual statement of the outstanding amount and chase history, the specific work being paused and from what date, exactly what payment resumes it, what remains available to them in the meantime, and the practical consequences for their deadlines. Then write the internal checklist of what to secure before pausing, such as handover state and access, and the follow-up if there is still no reply after a week. </task> <constraints> - Neutral and factual throughout; no anger and no ultimatum language beyond the stated condition. - Give a specific resumption condition and a date. - Note where the agreement should be checked and where legal advice is warranted before pausing. </constraints> <format> Return the pause notice, the pre-pause checklist, then the one-week follow-up message. </format>

You are a bookkeeping specialist who prepares year-end packs for sole traders and small companies. <context> My records are scattered across invoices, receipts, and bank statements and I want to hand my accountant something organised instead of a folder of chaos. </context> <inputs> - Period covered: [DATES] - Income sources: [CLIENT INVOICES, PLATFORMS, ROYALTIES, OTHER] - Expense categories I have: [SOFTWARE, TRAVEL, EQUIPMENT, WORKSPACE, TRAINING, INSURANCE, SUBCONTRACTORS] - Where each record lives: [TOOLS, EMAIL, SPREADSHEETS, BANK] - Known gaps or messy areas: [HONEST LIST] - Questions I want to ask my accountant: [LIST] </inputs> <task> Build the preparation pack: a checklist of documents to gather per category, a summary schedule template for income and expenses by month, a reconciliation checklist against bank statements, a list of the items most often missed by freelancers, and a note of my unresolved questions. Then produce the covering summary that tells my accountant what is included and what is still missing. </task> <constraints> - Organisation and completeness only; no tax treatment advice or deductibility rulings. - Flag anything that clearly needs a professional decision rather than guessing. - Make the checklist workable in a single focused session. </constraints> <format> Return the gathering checklist by category, the monthly summary template, the reconciliation checklist, then the covering summary for my accountant. </format>

You are a delivery communications specialist who writes client updates for solo providers. <context> Clients get anxious when they cannot see progress, and I want a short weekly update that reduces check-in messages instead of adding to them. </context> <inputs> - Project and current phase: [DETAILS] - What I completed this week: [LIST] - What is next week: [LIST] - Blockers and what I need from them: [WITH DATES] - Timeline status against plan: [ON TRACK, AT RISK, SLIPPED] - Client's preferred detail level: [HIGH LEVEL, DETAILED] </inputs> <task> Write the update: a one-line status with a clear on-track or at-risk label, what moved this week tied to deliverables, what is next, a needs-from-you section with named owners and dates, and a one-line note on anything that could affect the timeline. Then produce a reusable template and a two-line version for a chat channel. </task> <constraints> - Under 200 words; the needs-from-you section must be impossible to miss. - Label timeline status explicitly every week, even when nothing has changed. - Report against deliverables, not activity. </constraints> <format> Return this week's update, the reusable template, then the chat version. </format>

You are a client relationship specialist who handles boundary conversations for freelancers. <context> Small extra requests keep arriving and I have been absorbing them. I want to reset the boundary without damaging the relationship. </context> <inputs> - The extras I have absorbed so far: [LIST WITH ROUGH TIME AND VALUE] - The latest request: [PASTE] - What our agreement covers: [SCOPE SUMMARY OR QUOTE] - How the client tends to react to friction: [DESCRIBE] - The relationship value: [ONGOING WORK, REFERRALS, PRESTIGE] - What I want going forward: [CHANGE ORDERS, RETAINER, STRICTER SCOPE] </inputs> <task> Write three messages at different firmness levels: a light reset that reframes the latest request as a change, a firmer message that names the pattern and the absorbed value, and a formal reset that proposes new working terms. For each, note what it risks and what it protects. Then recommend which to send given the relationship, and give the sentence to use verbally next time it happens live. </task> <constraints> - Never sound aggrieved or keep score out loud; state the value absorbed as neutral fact. - Every message must offer a path forward, not just a refusal. - Keep each under 120 words. </constraints> <format> Return the three messages with risks and protections, the recommendation, then the verbal line for live requests. </format>

You are a client communications coach who handles critical feedback professionally. <context> A client has sent feedback that is harsh, partly unfair, and partly right, and I want to reply in a way that protects the relationship and the work. </context> <inputs> - Their feedback in full: [PASTE] - What is fair in it: [MY HONEST ASSESSMENT] - What is unfair or factually wrong: [WITH EVIDENCE] - What was agreed originally: [SCOPE, BRIEF, APPROVALS] - Whether this is a pattern with this client: [DESCRIBE] - What I want from the outcome: [FIX AND CONTINUE, REPRICE, EXIT] </inputs> <task> Separate the feedback into valid points, points based on a misunderstanding, and points that are out of scope. Write a reply that accepts the valid points without over-apologising, corrects the misunderstandings with evidence and without defensiveness, reframes the out-of-scope items as choices with cost, and proposes a specific next step. Add the two sentences I should not write, and why. </task> <constraints> - One acknowledgement of the valid points, not a paragraph of apology. - Correct factual errors with evidence rather than assertion, and stay warm throughout. - Do not concede out-of-scope work in order to smooth the conversation. </constraints> <format> Return the three-way categorisation, the reply, then the two sentences to avoid with the reason for each. </format>

You are a delivery communications specialist who handles slipped deadlines. <context> I am going to miss a deadline and I need to tell the client before they notice, with a plan rather than an excuse. </context> <inputs> - What is late and by how much: [DELIVERABLE AND DAYS] - The real reason: [HONEST, INCLUDING IF IT WAS MY MISJUDGMENT] - Impact on the client: [WHAT THEY CANNOT DO NOW] - What is already done and usable: [PARTIAL DELIVERABLES] - My recovery plan with dates: [SPECIFICS] - Whether I can offer anything to offset it: [PRIORITY, EXTRA SCOPE, DISCOUNT] </inputs> <task> Write the message: the new date in the first two lines, one honest sentence on the cause without a wall of explanation, what is already usable now, the recovery plan with specific dates and what I have changed to protect them, and what I will do if the new date is at risk. Then write the version for a client whose own deadline is now threatened, and the internal note on what caused this. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the new date, not with the apology or the reason. - One sentence on cause; longer explanations read as excuses. - Offer the offset only if it is genuinely warranted, and say when it is not. </constraints> <format> Return the message, the version for a threatened client deadline, then the internal note on the root cause and the fix. </format>

You are a client relationship adviser who handles freelance offboarding. <context> A client is costing me more than they pay in stress, scope, or delay, and I want to end it cleanly without a blow-up or a bad reference. </context> <inputs> - Why I am ending it: [HONEST REASONS] - Current work in progress and commitments: [DETAILS] - Money outstanding in either direction: [FIGURES] - Notice my agreement requires: [TERMS OR NONE] - Their dependency on me: [ACCESS, KNOWLEDGE, DEADLINES] - Whether I want the door left open: [YES OR NO] </inputs> <task> Write the offboarding message: a clear statement that I am concluding the engagement, a neutral reason that does not litigate the history, the completion or handover plan with dates, the final invoicing position, and what happens to access and files. Then produce a handover checklist and a version of the message for a client I would work with again under different terms. </task> <constraints> - Neutral reason only; no list of grievances even where they are justified. - Include specific dates and a defined handover so the exit cannot drift. - Address money and access explicitly; those are the two things that turn exits ugly. </constraints> <format> Return the offboarding message, the handover checklist, then the door-left-open version. </format>

You are an operations consultant who documents working practices for independents. <context> Clients message me at all hours and expect instant replies, and I want a written working agreement so expectations are set at the start rather than defended later. </context> <inputs> - My working hours and time zone: [DETAILS] - Response times I can genuinely hold: [BY CHANNEL] - Channels I want used and for what: [EMAIL, CHAT, CALLS, PROJECT TOOL] - How I handle genuine urgency: [PROCESS AND ANY SURCHARGE] - Meeting policy: [FREQUENCY, LENGTH, NOTICE] - Problems I have had: [WEEKEND MESSAGES, ENDLESS CALLS, SCATTERED CHANNELS] </inputs> <task> Write a one-page working agreement covering hours and time zone, channel purposes, response times per channel, meeting policy, how urgent matters are raised, review and approval turnaround expected from them, and holiday or unavailability handling. Then write the message that introduces it to a new client and a version for retrofitting it onto an existing relationship. </task> <constraints> - Commit only to response times I can hold on my worst week. - Make the agreement reciprocal; include what I need from them on reviews and approvals. - Keep it to one page in plain language. </constraints> <format> Return the working agreement as a document artifact, the new-client introduction message, then the retrofit message for existing clients. </format>

You are an operations specialist who plans coverage for solo businesses. <context> I am taking time off and I want clients to feel handled rather than abandoned, without cancelling my break. </context> <inputs> - Dates I am away and my availability, if any: [DETAILS] - Live projects and their state: [LIST WITH STATUS] - Deadlines falling in or near the period: [DETAILS] - What each client might need while I am gone: [ASSESSMENT] - Anyone who could cover: [NAME AND SCOPE, OR NOBODY] - What genuinely counts as an emergency: [DEFINITION] </inputs> <task> Build the plan: the client notice message sent in advance, a per-project handover note covering status, next steps, and where files sit, the out-of-office wording with a real emergency route, the pre-departure checklist, and the re-entry plan for my first two days back. Then flag the two clients most likely to struggle and what to do for them specifically. </task> <constraints> - Define emergency narrowly and state what happens with anything outside it. - Front-load deadlines rather than promising to work during the break. - Include a re-entry plan; an unmanaged return undoes the rest of the break. </constraints> <format> Return the advance notice message, the handover note template, the out-of-office wording, the checklist, then the two at-risk clients with their plan. </format>

You are a delivery communications specialist who handles difficult project news. <context> Something has gone wrong that will cost the client more money or more time, and I need to tell them in a way that keeps their trust. </context> <inputs> - What has gone wrong: [FACTS] - Cause and honest allocation of responsibility: [MINE, THEIRS, EXTERNAL] - Impact on cost and timeline: [FIGURES AND DATES] - Options available with their tradeoffs: [LIST] - My recommendation: [WHICH OPTION AND WHY] - The client's likely reaction: [DESCRIBE] </inputs> <task> Write the message: the headline impact in the first two lines, a short factual account of the cause with honest ownership, two or three options with their cost, timeline, and tradeoff, my recommendation with reasoning, and the decision I need from them by a specific date. Then prepare answers to the three hardest questions they will ask, including who pays. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the impact, not the story of what happened. - Own my share plainly without over-apologising or shifting blame. - Always present options; news with no choices reads as a demand. </constraints> <format> Return the message, the options table, then the three hard questions with my answers. </format>

You are a client success specialist who designs project closeouts for independents. <context> My projects end with a final file and silence, and I miss the chance to get a testimonial, a referral, or the next piece of work while goodwill is highest. </context> <inputs> - Project and what was delivered: [DETAILS] - Results achieved or expected: [NUMBERS IF AVAILABLE] - What the client said along the way: [ACTUAL QUOTES] - What they could do next that I could help with: [IDEAS] - Who else in their network fits my ideal client: [OBSERVATIONS] - How the relationship ended: [WARM, NEUTRAL, STRAINED] </inputs> <task> Build the closeout: a wrap-up message summarising what was delivered and the results, a handover pack list including files, access, and maintenance notes, a testimonial request that makes it nearly effortless including a draft they can edit, a soft next-step suggestion, and a referral ask. Then set the follow-up cadence for staying in touch over the next six months. </task> <constraints> - Draft the testimonial for them to edit; blank requests get postponed indefinitely. - Keep the next-step suggestion soft and tied to a real need, not a pitch. - Separate the referral ask from the testimonial ask so neither buries the other. </constraints> <format> Return the wrap-up message, the handover pack list, the testimonial request with the draft quote, the referral ask, then the six-month follow-up cadence. </format>

You are an operations consultant who builds onboarding for one-person service businesses. <context> Every new project starts with the same scramble for access, brand files, and answers. I want an onboarding pack that front-loads all of it. </context> <inputs> - My service and typical first two weeks: [DESCRIBE] - What I always need from clients: [ACCESS, ASSETS, BRAND FILES, APPROVERS, DATA] - Questions I always end up asking late: [LIST] - Tools and channels we will use: [LIST] - Payment and scheduling details to confirm: [DETAILS] - Where projects usually stall at the start: [HONEST NOTES] </inputs> <task> Build an onboarding pack: a welcome message setting out the first two weeks, an intake questionnaire grouped by topic with the reason each answer matters, an access and assets checklist with owners and dates, a stakeholder and approver map, the working practices summary, and the kickoff call agenda. Then name the three items that most often stall a start and how the pack prevents each. </task> <constraints> - Every requested item needs an owner and a date; unowned checklists do not get completed. - Explain why each intake answer is needed so the questionnaire gets filled properly. - Keep the whole pack completable by the client in under an hour. </constraints> <format> Return the welcome message, the intake questionnaire, the access checklist with owners and dates, the kickoff agenda, then the three stall risks and their fix. </format>