Claude Prompts for Hiring Decisions That Hold Up

Design interview loop for [role + level]. Output: stages (recruiter screen, hiring manager, peer panel, leadership, exec final), competencies tested per stage, interview format per stage (behavioral, technical, case, work sample), time per stage, who interviews, what each stage filters for. No redundancy.

Generate behavioral interview questions for [competency]. Output: 5 STAR-format questions, what good answer reveals, what concerning answer reveals, 2 follow-up probes per question to verify depth, alternative phrasings if candidate doesn't engage. Specific to competency, not generic.

Design work sample for [role]. Constraints: under 4 hours candidate time, simulates real job, evaluatable against rubric. Output: brief, materials provided, time guidance, deliverables expected, rubric for evaluation. Test the actual job, not unrelated puzzles.

[Paste technical interview questions]. Calibrate difficulty: appropriate for [level], same difficulty across candidates? Are questions known via leak? Are they real-job-relevant or trivia? What signal does each question give vs what we need to know? Recommend swaps.

[Paste interview notes]. Convert to structured scorecard. Output: per competency tested, score 1-4 with anchor description, evidence from interview supporting score (specific quotes/moments), gaps still to assess, overall recommendation lean. Score before debrief, not during — order matters.

[Paste resume]. Pre-screen for [role]. Output: relevant experience score 1-5, gaps to probe in interview, claims to verify (specific titles, scope, outcomes), interview format that'd signal best, what about this candidate is unusual (good or concerning).

[Paste reference call notes from 2-3 references]. Synthesize patterns: confirmed strengths (multiple references), patterns of concern (multiple references), one-off feedback (single reference, possible bias), what surprises me, what aligns with interview signals.

[Paste take-home submission]. Evaluate against rubric: technical correctness, code/work quality, judgment shown, communication of approach, what they prioritized + cut, time management. Score 1-4 per dimension. What I'd want to discuss in follow-up.

I'm facilitating debrief for [candidate]. 4 interviewers, scores submitted independently. Output: agenda (15 min individual + 30 min discussion), order of speaking (lowest score first to surface concerns), specific concerns to dig into, decision call protocol, who has tiebreaker.

[Paste 3-5 candidate scorecards]. Calibrate: are scores consistent across candidates? Are interviewers stricter/lenient consistently? Where do scores diverge significantly + why? Which candidate is strongest holistically + on what dimensions? Help me calibrate before final decision.

2 candidates remain, both qualified. [Paste both scorecards]. Help me decide: what each does better than the other, where each is weaker, which fits role today + which fits role tomorrow, which fits team chemistry, which is risk-taking call vs safe call. Force a choice.

I'm saying no to [candidate]. Help me articulate why specifically: what gap (skill / experience / fit), what alternative I needed but didn't see, what would change my decision (if anything), what feedback I could share with candidate. Decision should be defensible internally.

Build offer for [candidate]. Inputs: their current comp, market data, internal equity, level. Output: base, equity, bonus, signing bonus if any, benefits worth $, total comp transparency, where I have flexibility, opening offer vs final-room.

Offer letter + closing pitch for [candidate]. Personalized opener referencing what excited them, role pitch (one paragraph, why this role specifically), comp summary, signing logistics, expected response timeline. Warm but professional. Final piece of selling — they're not in yet.

Candidate received counter-offer from current employer. Help me respond: validate the choice they're facing, articulate why our offer + opportunity is the right move, address what counter-offer is actually about (money, fear, sunk cost), give them permission to decide what's right.