50 Claude Prompts That Write Investor Updates

You are a reporting analyst who builds the metrics table that goes at the top of every investor update. <context> I report a different set of numbers every month in a different order, so nobody can see a trend. </context> <inputs> - Metric list with this month, last month, and three months ago: [PASTE] - Plan or target per metric: [NUMBERS] - Definitions currently in use: [PASTE] - Metrics I have been avoiding: [LIST] </inputs> <task> Build the metrics table: metric, current, prior, change, versus plan, and a one-line so-what per row. Order rows by importance to the business and state the ordering logic so it never changes again. </task> <constraints> - The same metrics in the same order every month, including the unflattering ones. - Show absolute values and percentage change together. - Mark any definition change explicitly in a footnote. </constraints> <format> Return the table artifact, then name the two rows that need written commentary this month. </format>

You are a finance operator who writes the metric definitions doc that stops arguments later. <context> Our numbers shift meaning between reports because active user, booked revenue, and churn are defined loosely. </context> <inputs> - Metrics currently reported: [LIST] - Where each number comes from: [SYSTEM OR SPREADSHEET] - Ambiguities to resolve: [E.G. ACTIVE USER WINDOW, BOOKED VERSUS RECOGNISED] - Fiscal calendar: [MONTH END RULES, FISCAL YEAR START] - Who owns each number: [NAMES OR ROLES] </inputs> <task> Write the definitions doc: for each KPI, the plain-English definition, the formula, the source system, the inclusion and exclusion rules, the owner, and the refresh timing. Then list every metric that currently has two conflicting definitions in use. </task> <constraints> - Resolve every ambiguity with an explicit rule, including edge cases like trials, refunds, and paused accounts. - Note the restatement policy for when a definition changes. - No metric without a named owner. </constraints> <format> Return a definitions table artifact plus the list of conflicting definitions to fix this week. </format>

You are an analyst who explains why metrics moved rather than restating that they moved. <context> My update lists numbers and my investors have to guess the cause of every change. </context> <inputs> - Metric movements this month: [METRIC, FROM, TO] - What happened operationally: [LAUNCHES, CAMPAIGNS, HIRES, OUTAGES] - One-off events: [LIST] - Seasonality in this business: [PATTERN] - Experiments running: [LIST] </inputs> <task> Write the commentary. For each significant move: the cause, the evidence that it is the cause, whether it repeats next month, and what I am doing next. Separate signal from noise and say which moves are within normal variance. </task> <constraints> - Never attribute a change to something without timing or data evidence. - Label one-offs as one-offs and remove them from the trend read. - Where the cause is unknown, say so and state how I will find out. </constraints> <format> Return a commentary block per metric, then flag the one movement that remains unexplained. </format>

You are a retention analyst who writes the cohort section of an investor report. <context> I have cohort data in a spreadsheet and no clear read on whether retention is actually improving. </context> <inputs> - Cohorts by signup month with retained values by period: [PASTE] - Retention definition: [LOGO OR REVENUE, WHAT COUNTS AS RETAINED] - Product changes with dates: [LIST] - Known churn reasons: [LIST] - Segment splits available: [PLAN, SIZE, CHANNEL] </inputs> <task> Build the retention report: the cohort table, a plain-English read of the curve shape, whether newer cohorts are better and by how much, the change that plausibly caused it, and the worst cohort explained honestly. </task> <constraints> - State whether this is logo or revenue retention on the report itself. - Show at least six periods where data exists and never average cohorts to smooth a bad one. - Only claim improvement where the timing of a product change supports it. </constraints> <format> Return the cohort table, the read-out paragraph for the update, and the retention question to expect at the next board meeting. </format>

You are a revenue analyst who separates real recurring revenue from everything else. <context> I report one revenue number and my investors cannot see how much is new, expansion, or lost, or how concentrated it is. </context> <inputs> - Starting and ending recurring revenue: [NUMBERS] - New, expansion, contraction, and churned revenue: [NUMBERS] - Top five customers as a share of revenue: [PERCENTS] - Contract terms: [MONTHLY, ANNUAL, MULTIYEAR] - Non-recurring revenue: [SERVICES, SETUP FEES] - Discounts in effect: [DETAILS] </inputs> <task> Build the revenue movement waterfall: each component with its number, net new, net revenue retention, concentration risk, and the quality flags covering annual versus monthly mix, discounting, and services revenue. </task> <constraints> - State the recognition rules used and keep services separate from recurring revenue. - Disclose any customer above 15 percent of revenue. - The components must reconcile exactly to the ending number. Flag any gap. </constraints> <format> Return the waterfall table, the quality notes, and the one number an investor will recompute themselves. </format>

You are a sales operations analyst who reports funnel performance to investors. <context> I report closed revenue but not how the funnel produced it, so nobody can see where the process leaks. </context> <inputs> - Volume at each stage this period: [NUMBERS] - Stage entry criteria: [DEFINITIONS] - Conversion rate between stages: [PERCENTS] - Average cycle length by segment: [DAYS] - Source mix: [INBOUND, OUTBOUND, REFERRAL, PARTNER] - Win and loss reasons: [LIST] </inputs> <task> Build the funnel report: stage-to-stage conversion with volumes, the largest leak identified with its cost in lost revenue, the cycle length trend, a comparison of source quality, and the fix currently in flight. </task> <constraints> - Define each stage entry criterion so the numbers mean something next month too. - Count closed-won only. Keep verbal commitments in a separate line. - Separate inbound from outbound performance rather than blending them. </constraints> <format> Return the funnel table, the leak diagnosis with its revenue cost, and one experiment for next month. </format>

You are a product analyst who reports engagement in a way investors can connect to revenue. <context> I report signups and total users, which tells investors nothing about whether the product is working. </context> <inputs> - Activation definition and rate: [DEFINITION, PERCENT] - Weekly and monthly active users: [NUMBERS] - Core action and its frequency per user: [ACTION, FREQUENCY] - Adoption of the newest feature: [PERCENT AND TIMEFRAME] - Time to first value: [MINUTES, DAYS] - Retention link if known: [WHAT ENGAGEMENT PREDICTS] </inputs> <task> Build the engagement report: the activation funnel, depth of usage, the core action trend, adoption of the newest release, and what engagement predicts about retention or revenue. </task> <constraints> - Define active precisely, including the window and what counts as an action. - Tie at least one engagement metric to retention or revenue with the actual correlation you observe. - No cumulative vanity totals such as all-time signups. </constraints> <format> Return the metrics block, then the single engagement insight that should change what the team does next month. </format>

You are a growth finance analyst who reports acquisition efficiency as a trend. <context> I reported CAC once during my raise and never again. Investors now want to see whether efficiency is improving. </context> <inputs> - CAC by channel for the last three periods: [NUMBERS] - Blended CAC and paid-only CAC: [NUMBERS] - Average contract value: [NUMBER] - Gross margin and what is included: [PERCENT, COSTS] - Payback months: [NUMBER] - Retention rates: [LOGO, NET REVENUE] </inputs> <task> Report unit economics as a trend: CAC and payback across three periods, gross margin, the ratio of lifetime value to CAC with the lifetime assumption named, what improved or degraded, and the lever I am pulling next. </task> <constraints> - Show blended and paid CAC separately and say whether salaries are loaded in. - Fully loaded gross margin including support and hosting. - Never present lifetime value without stating the lifetime assumption and its source. </constraints> <format> Return the trend table, one line explaining the change, and what to watch next month. </format>

You are an analyst who investigates a strange metric movement before it becomes a question. <context> One of my metrics moved in a way that will trigger questions, and I want to explain it before anyone asks. </context> <inputs> - The metric and the movement: [METRIC, FROM, TO] - When it happened: [DATE OR WEEK] - What changed around then: [PRICING, TRACKING, CAMPAIGN, OUTAGE, MIGRATION] - The data check I already ran: [WHAT YOU VERIFIED] - The underlying trend excluding the anomaly: [NUMBERS] </inputs> <task> Write the anomaly note: what moved and by how much, the verified cause, whether it is a data problem or a business problem, whether the underlying trend is intact, the correction if the number was wrong, and what prevents a repeat. </task> <constraints> - Distinguish clearly between a tracking error and a real change in the business. - Show the check that was run, not just the conclusion. - If historical numbers were wrong, restate them explicitly rather than quietly updating. </constraints> <format> Return the short version for the update plus the longer explanation to keep ready for follow-up questions. </format>

You are a dashboard designer who builds the one-page metrics view that ships with every update. <context> I want one screenshot that shows my whole business, laid out identically every month so trends are obvious. </context> <inputs> - The six to eight metrics I report: [LIST] - Plan targets per metric: [NUMBERS] - History available per metric: [MONTHS] - Audience: [FUNDS, BOARD, ANGELS] - Tool I will build it in: [SHEETS, NOTION, LOOKER, FIGMA] </inputs> <task> Design the one-page metrics view: the layout zones, which metric goes where and why, the chart type per metric, how versus-plan is shown, and the fixed footer of definitions. Then give build instructions for the tool I named. </task> <constraints> - Fits one page or one screenshot with no scrolling. - Identical layout every month, including position and scale. - Every chart shows at least six periods with labelled axes and a stated definition. </constraints> <format> Return the layout spec artifact plus step-by-step build instructions for the named tool. </format>

You are an advisor who coaches founders through reporting a miss without losing credibility. <context> We missed the plan this quarter and I need to tell investors in a way that shows I understand why. </context> <inputs> - Plan versus actual: [TARGET, ACTUAL, GAP] - Root cause and the evidence for it: [CAUSE, PROOF] - What I knew and when: [TIMELINE] - The corrective plan with owners and dates: [ACTIONS] - Revised forecast: [NEW NUMBERS] </inputs> <task> Write the missed-plan section: the miss in the first sentence, the diagnosis with evidence, what changes with owners and dates, the revised forecast I will be held to, and the signal that would make me change strategy rather than tactics. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the miss. Never open with wins and reach the miss in paragraph four. - One root cause, evidenced. A list of five causes reads as no diagnosis at all. - The revised forecast must be a number, not a range with a hopeful top end. </constraints> <format> Return the update section plus the three questions to be ready for on the follow-up call. </format>

You are a startup CFO who reports cash position without softening it. <context> Runway is getting shorter and my investors need the real picture plus the plan, not a reassuring paragraph. </context> <inputs> - Cash in bank and date: [AMOUNT, DATE] - Net burn for the last three months: [NUMBERS] - Planned burn: [NUMBER] - Revenue ramp assumption: [NUMBERS] - Next raise timing: [TARGET DATES] - Cuts available if needed: [OPTIONS AND SAVINGS] </inputs> <task> Write the runway section: cash, burn trend, months of runway, the date runway ends, the plan to extend it, the trigger points where I cut costs, and what I need from investors now. </task> <constraints> - Define net burn and use it consistently. - Show runway with no new revenue as well as the base case. Do not fund runway with forecast revenue. - Name the decision date for cuts, not a range. </constraints> <format> Return the cash table, the section text, and the trigger-point list with dates. </format>

You are an executive advisor who writes the investor note about a team reduction. <context> We are reducing the team and I need to tell investors clearly, after the team has been told. </context> <inputs> - Number of people and functions affected: [DETAILS] - The reason: [BURN, STRATEGY SHIFT, DEMAND] - Savings and new monthly burn: [NUMBERS] - Severance and support approach: [DETAILS] - Who stays and why the remaining plan works: [STRUCTURE] - Customer or delivery impact: [RISK] </inputs> <task> Write the investor note: the decision, the reasoning, the new burn and runway, the retained plan and why it works with fewer people, how the team was treated, and the risks I am now carrying. </task> <constraints> - Respectful and factual. No euphemisms such as right-sizing or streamlining. - State the new monthly burn as a single number. - This goes out only after the affected people have been told. </constraints> <format> Return the note artifact, a three-line version for the monthly update, and the questions the board will ask. </format>

You are a customer-success leader who writes honest churn disclosures for investors. <context> We lost a customer that everyone on my investor list knows by name, and I need to report it before they hear it elsewhere. </context> <inputs> - Customer and revenue impact: [NAME OR DESCRIPTOR, AMOUNT] - Share of total revenue: [PERCENT] - The real reason they left: [HONEST CAUSE] - What we learned: [FINDINGS] - Remaining concentration risk: [OTHER LARGE ACCOUNTS] - Retention plan for similar accounts: [ACTIONS] </inputs> <task> Write the churn disclosure: the loss, the revenue and percentage impact, the honest reason, whether it is specific to that account or systemic, and the specific changes for the accounts that look like them. </task> <constraints> - Disclose the percentage of revenue lost, not just the dollar figure. - Name the real reason even when it is our fault. - Say which other accounts are now at risk and what is being done this month. </constraints> <format> Return the disclosure section plus a summary of the internal at-risk watchlist. </format>

You are a strategy advisor who helps founders announce a pivot with evidence rather than enthusiasm. <context> The current business is not working and we are changing direction. Investors need to see the data behind the decision. </context> <inputs> - Current business and the evidence it is not working: [METRICS] - The new direction: [WHAT WE DO NOW] - Evidence for the new direction: [CUSTOMER SIGNALS, DATA] - What carries over: [TEAM, TECH, CUSTOMERS] - Cost and timeline of the change: [NUMBERS, DATES] - What we are stopping entirely: [LIST] </inputs> <task> Write the pivot update: what the data said, the decision, the new thesis with its evidence, what transfers, the plan and its cost, and how we will know within 90 days whether it is working. </task> <constraints> - Show the killed hypothesis and the specific data that killed it. - Define a 90-day falsification test with a number and a date. - State clearly what we are stopping, including anything customers rely on. </constraints> <format> Return a memo artifact plus a five-line summary for the monthly email. </format>

You are a people and governance advisor who writes departure notes to investors. <context> A co-founder or key executive is leaving and I need investors informed before they hear it from someone else. </context> <inputs> - Who is leaving and their role: [NAME, ROLE] - Coverage plan with names and dates: [WHO PICKS UP WHAT] - Agreed public reason: [WORDING BOTH SIDES ACCEPT] - Equity and transition treatment: [VESTING, CLIFF, ADVISORY] - Customer or team risk: [WHAT COULD BREAK] - Hiring plan for the role: [TIMELINE] </inputs> <task> Write the departure note: the fact, the coverage plan with names and dates, the equity and transition treatment, the risks this creates, and the hiring plan. </task> <constraints> - Use wording agreed with the person leaving. No blame in either direction. - State the equity treatment because investors will ask about it immediately. - Send before the news reaches them through the team or LinkedIn. </constraints> <format> Return the note artifact plus a short FAQ covering what to tell team, customers, and investors. </format>

You are a fundraising advisor who writes the bridge request to existing investors. <context> I need more time before a priced round and I am asking my current investors for a bridge. </context> <inputs> - Cash and runway today: [NUMBERS, DATE] - The metrics story since the last round: [PROGRESS] - What the bridge buys: [MILESTONES AND DATES] - Amount and structure proposed: [AMOUNT, INSTRUMENT, TERMS] - Who is already committed: [STATUS] - The plan if it does not fill: [ACTIONS] </inputs> <task> Write the bridge memo for existing investors: why now, what the money buys with dated milestones, the structure, the participation ask with a deadline, and the plan if the bridge does not close. </task> <constraints> - Be explicit about the amount, the instrument, and the deadline. - Show the specific milestone that unlocks a priced round and the evidence it is reachable. - No pressure tactics. State consequences factually and let the numbers do the work. </constraints> <format> Return the memo artifact plus the individual ask email to send to each existing investor. </format>

You are an incident communications lead who writes the investor note after a serious incident. <context> We had an outage or security incident that affected customers and my investors need the facts from me. </context> <inputs> - What happened: [DESCRIPTION] - Timeline with timestamps: [DETECTION, MITIGATION, RESOLUTION] - Customers or data affected: [SCOPE] - Root cause if known: [CAUSE OR INVESTIGATION STATUS] - Remediation done and still open: [ITEMS WITH DATES] - Customer and regulatory notification status: [STATUS] </inputs> <task> Write the investor incident note: what happened, the blast radius, the timeline, the root cause or investigation status, what is fixed, what is still open with dates and owners, notification status, and the systemic change that prevents a repeat. </task> <constraints> - Facts and timestamps only. No speculation about cause before the postmortem is complete. - State legal, contractual, and regulatory notification status explicitly. - Do not minimise scope. Understating it once destroys credibility on everything after. </constraints> <format> Return the incident note, the paragraph for the monthly update, and the open-items list with owners and dates. </format>

You are a fundraising advisor who frames a down round honestly to existing investors. <context> The new round is priced at or below our last valuation and I need to explain why this is the right trade. </context> <inputs> - Last round terms: [VALUATION, AMOUNT, DATE] - Current metrics: [NUMBERS] - Market comparables: [RECENT ROUNDS, MULTIPLES] - Proposed new terms: [VALUATION, AMOUNT, STRUCTURE] - Dilution impact including pool refresh: [PERCENTS] - Alternatives considered and their numbers: [BRIDGE, CUTS, SALE] </inputs> <task> Write the framing memo: why this is the right trade against each alternative, the dilution math including the option pool, the terms and their consequences such as preferences and anti-dilution, and what the round buys. </task> <constraints> - Show the rejected alternatives with their actual numbers, not just as a list. - State dilution honestly, including the pool refresh and any structure that affects the common stock. - No blaming market conditions without comparable rounds to support it. </constraints> <format> Return the memo artifact, a one-page terms summary, and the talking points for telling the team. </format>

You are a startup CFO who builds cost reduction plans that actually extend runway. <context> I need to cut burn and show investors the plan, the savings, and the runway it buys. </context> <inputs> - Current burn by category: [PAYROLL, TOOLS, MARKETING, CONTRACTORS, OFFICE] - Cuts under consideration: [LIST WITH ESTIMATED SAVINGS] - Contract commitments and exit costs: [DETAILS] - Headcount plan changes: [ROLES] - Revenue capacity I must protect: [WHAT CANNOT BE CUT] </inputs> <task> Build the cost plan: a line-by-line before and after with savings per line, the runway gained, what I refuse to cut and why, and the sequence with dates. </task> <constraints> - Savings must be net of severance, notice periods, and contract exit costs. - Protect revenue-generating capacity and say explicitly what that is. - Present the new monthly burn as one number an investor can hold you to. </constraints> <format> Return the before-and-after table, the sequenced plan with dates, and the summary paragraph for the investor update. </format>

You are a founder coach who fixes the asks section that everyone ignores. <context> Every update I send ends with a vague request for help and nothing ever comes back. </context> <inputs> - What I need right now: [LIST] - Why each matters this month: [REASON] - Who exactly can help: [COMPANIES, TITLES, PROFILES] - What a good introduction looks like: [FORMAT, WARMTH] - Deadline for each: [DATES] - What I will do with it: [NEXT STEP AFTER THE INTRO] </inputs> <task> Write the asks section: three asks maximum, each with the specific target, the reason it matters now, the exact action requested, and the deadline. Add a forwardable blurb per ask that needs no editing. </task> <constraints> - Name companies, titles, or profiles. Never write that any introductions are welcome. - One line per ask in the update itself, with the detail in the forwardable blurb. - Say what happens after the intro so people know their effort produces something. </constraints> <format> Return the ask block for the update plus the forwardable blurbs as separate blocks. </format>

You are a sales leader who turns an investor list into a pipeline source. <context> My investors know people at companies I am trying to sell to, and I have never given them a usable target list. </context> <inputs> - Ideal customer profile: [SEGMENT, SIZE, BUYER TITLE] - Named target accounts: [LIST] - Value proposition for that buyer: [ONE LINE] - Traction proof I can share: [METRIC OR CUSTOMER] - Which investors have relevant portfolios or networks: [NAMES] - Meeting length I am asking for: [MINUTES] </inputs> <task> Write the customer intro ask: the target list grouped by the investor most likely to know them, a two-sentence forwardable pitch for the buyer, the meeting ask, and the follow-through promise. </task> <constraints> - Ten named accounts maximum per send. A longer list gets skipped entirely. - The forwardable text must stand alone with no context above it. - State the meeting length asked for so the intro is easy to make. </constraints> <format> Return the account-to-investor mapping table plus the forwardable intro text. </format>

You are a technical recruiter who writes hiring asks that investors actually forward. <context> I am hiring for hard roles and my updates just say we are hiring, with a careers page link. </context> <inputs> - Open roles with level and comp band: [ROLES, BANDS] - The profile that succeeds here: [BACKGROUND, SKILLS] - Companies worth poaching from: [LIST] - Location and remote policy: [DETAILS] - Urgency and start date: [TIMING] - Interview process length: [STEPS, DAYS] </inputs> <task> Write the hiring ask: a one-paragraph blurb per role, the poach list, a referral message a busy investor can forward without editing, and the process promise covering response time and number of steps. </task> <constraints> - One paragraph per role maximum, with the comp band and location stated. - Include the poach list. Naming companies produces better referrals than describing a profile. - Promise a response time and honour it, because referrals stop when the first one goes cold. </constraints> <format> Return the role blurbs, the forwardable referral message, and the poach list. </format>

You are an operator who recruits advisors for specific, bounded problems. <context> I need expertise on one specific problem and my current ask sounds like a request for general advice. </context> <inputs> - The problem in one sentence: [SPECIFIC PROBLEM] - The profile of who has solved it: [BACKGROUND] - Time commitment I am asking for: [HOURS PER MONTH OR ONE CALL] - Compensation offered: [EQUITY, CASH, NONE] - What I would ask them first: [QUESTIONS] - What I already tried: [ATTEMPTS] </inputs> <task> Write the advisor ask: the problem in one sentence, the expert profile, the engagement offer with time and compensation, and the agenda for the first conversation. </task> <constraints> - Name the problem specifically. Nobody responds to a request for growth advice. - State the compensation upfront, including if the answer is nothing yet. - Cap the commitment so a yes is easy, for example one 45-minute call. </constraints> <format> Return the ask text, a forwardable one-paragraph brief, and the first-call agenda. </format>

You are a partnerships lead who writes channel introduction requests. <context> There are companies whose distribution would change our growth, and my investors can reach them. </context> <inputs> - Target partner companies: [LIST] - The integration or channel logic: [HOW IT WORKS] - What is in it for them: [THEIR BENEFIT] - Proof we can execute: [EXISTING PARTNERSHIPS, CAPACITY] - Who owns this internally: [NAME AND ROLE] - The team or title to reach at each partner: [ROLES] </inputs> <task> Write the partnership intro ask: the target list, the mutual value in two sentences, the specific person or team to reach at each, and the first-meeting agenda. Add a forwardable summary. </task> <constraints> - State the value to the partner before the value to us. - Only ask for partners we have the capacity to support. Name the internal owner. - No strategic partnership language without a concrete first step attached. </constraints> <format> Return the target table, the forwardable summary, and the first-meeting agenda. </format>

You are a founder who uses an investor's portfolio properly instead of asking for everything. <context> My investors have portfolios full of companies that could be customers, partners, or peers, and I have never asked precisely. </context> <inputs> - Portfolio companies that fit: [NAMES] - Why each one fits: [CUSTOMER, PARTNER, PEER LEARNING] - The specific ask per company: [WHAT YOU WANT] - What I can offer them: [VALUE BACK] - Timing: [WHEN] </inputs> <task> Write the portfolio ask: which companies, the reason for each, the specific ask per company, and a version the investor can paste into their portfolio channel. </task> <constraints> - Say plainly whether each ask is a sales ask or a peer-learning ask. Mixing them annoys everyone. - Three companies maximum per request. - The paste-ready message must be under 60 words and include what we offer back. </constraints> <format> Return the company list with reasons, the specific asks, and the paste-ready message. </format>

You are a communications coach who writes follow-ups that do not create resentment. <context> I asked for the same introduction in two updates and nothing happened. I want to follow up once and then let it go. </context> <inputs> - The original ask and when I sent it: [ASK, DATES] - Who it went to: [NAMES] - What has changed since: [PROGRESS OR URGENCY] - Why it still matters, with a number: [IMPACT] - A smaller version of the ask: [EASIER VERSION] </inputs> <task> Write the nudge: the restated ask in one line, why it matters more now with a number, an easier alternative version, and explicit permission to say no or pass it to someone else. </task> <constraints> - No guilt, no scorekeeping, no reference to how long they have not replied. - The new version must be smaller than the original ask. - One follow-up only. Include the line that closes the loop gracefully if the answer is no. </constraints> <format> Return the nudge email plus the smaller alternative ask as a separate one-liner. </format>

You are a founder who reports back on every introduction so people keep making them. <context> Someone made an introduction and I never told them what happened, which is the fastest way to stop receiving intros. </context> <inputs> - Who made the intro: [NAME] - Who it was to: [PERSON AND COMPANY] - What happened: [MEETING, DEAL, NO RESPONSE] - The outcome or number: [RESULT] - Next step: [WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW] - What specifically helped: [WHAT THEIR FRAMING DID] </inputs> <task> Write the loop-back: what came of the introduction with a concrete result, what I did with it, what happens next, and a specific thank you. Then write the one line to include in the next update so the whole list sees that intros produce outcomes. </task> <constraints> - Report outcomes even when the intro failed, and say why it failed. - No generic gratitude. Name what their framing or credibility actually did. - Include a number wherever one exists. </constraints> <format> Return the loop-back note plus the one-line social proof for the next update. </format>

You are a copywriter who writes the paragraph investors paste into their own emails. <context> When investors offer to introduce me, they ask for something to forward, and I send them three paragraphs they then have to rewrite. </context> <inputs> - Company in one line: [WHAT WE DO FOR WHOM] - The proof point: [METRIC, CUSTOMER, MILESTONE] - The audience for the forward: [BUYER, CANDIDATE, PARTNER, INVESTOR] - The specific ask: [WHAT YOU WANT TO HAPPEN] - Links to include: [SITE, DECK, ROLE] - Anything to omit: [CONFIDENTIAL ITEMS] </inputs> <task> Write a forwardable blurb an investor can paste with zero editing: 60 to 90 words covering who we are, the proof, what we want, and the next step. Then write a 25-word version for chat and a subject line for the forward. </task> <constraints> - No internal jargon and no confidential metrics. - It must work with no context above it, since the recipient may only see the paste. - One clear action, written so the recipient knows exactly what a yes involves. </constraints> <format> Return the 90-word blurb, the 25-word version, and the subject line. </format>

You are a startup communications advisor who writes media introduction requests. <context> I want press or podcast coverage and my ask reads like a request for publicity rather than a story worth telling. </context> <inputs> - The story I can actually tell: [ANGLE, WHAT CHANGED] - Why it is timely: [TRIGGER, DATA, EVENT] - Target outlets or shows: [LIST] - Data or access I can offer: [EXCLUSIVE NUMBERS, CUSTOMERS] - Spokesperson and availability: [WHO, WHEN] - What is off the record: [LIMITS] </inputs> <task> Write the media intro ask: the story angle in one sentence, why it is timely now, the target list, what we can offer such as data or customer access, and a forwardable pitch a journalist or producer would respond to. </task> <constraints> - The angle must be about a change in the world or in the data, not about our funding. - Only offer data we are cleared to share, and say what is off the record. - Keep the journalist-facing pitch under 100 words. </constraints> <format> Return the ask block, the forwardable media pitch, and the proof points to attach. </format>

You are a founder who writes an annual letter that reads as a genuine account of the year. <context> It is year end and I want to write one letter that covers what happened, what I got wrong, and what we are doing next year. </context> <inputs> - Metrics at the start and end of the year: [NUMBERS] - The thesis we started the year with and whether it held: [DETAILS] - The biggest win: [WHAT AND WHY IT MATTERED] - The biggest mistake and what it cost: [HONEST ANSWER] - Team growth and structure changes: [DETAILS] - Next year plan and the single biggest bet: [DETAILS] - Cash position: [NUMBERS] </inputs> <task> Write the annual letter: the year in one number, what we got right, what we got wrong and what it cost, how the strategy changed as a result, next year's plan with target numbers and the one big bet, and the cash position. </task> <constraints> - Name one real mistake with its cost in money or time. - State next year's target numbers explicitly rather than describing ambitions. - Between 1000 and 1500 words, in first person, in my voice. </constraints> <format> Return the letter artifact plus a six-bullet executive summary for the top of the email. </format>

You are a board operator who writes pre-reads so meetings are spent on decisions. <context> My board meetings get consumed by walking through slides, and we run out of time before the decisions. </context> <inputs> - Period results versus plan: [NUMBERS] - Decisions requiring the board: [LIST] - Options and tradeoffs per decision: [DETAILS] - Risks I am tracking: [LIST WITH SEVERITY] - Metrics pack reference: [WHERE IT LIVES] - Meeting date and length: [DATE, MINUTES] </inputs> <task> Write the pre-read: performance versus plan with variance explained, the two or three decisions requiring the board with options and my recommendation for each, the risk register, and an estimated reading time. </task> <constraints> - Sent 72 hours before the meeting and stated as such at the top. - Decisions come first, results second. Nothing gets presented in the meeting that is not in the pre-read. - Every option includes the cost of doing nothing. </constraints> <format> Return the memo artifact plus the meeting agenda derived from the decisions, with time allocated per item. </format>

You are a chief of staff who builds board decks for governance and operating review. <context> This deck is for people who already invested. It is an operating review and a governance meeting, not a pitch, and it should read that way. </context> <inputs> - Period covered: [QUARTER OR MONTH] - Plan versus actual by metric: [NUMBERS] - Functional updates: [PRODUCT, SALES, ENGINEERING, PEOPLE] - Decisions requested from the board: [LIST] - Risks and mitigations: [LIST] - Financials and cash: [NUMBERS] - Hiring status: [OPEN ROLES, OFFERS] </inputs> <task> Outline the board deck: the sequence from performance versus plan through function-by-function operating detail, financials and cash, decisions requested, risks, and appendix. State the job of each section and the minutes allocated to it. </task> <constraints> - No selling and no vision slides. This audience is already invested. - Every section reports variance against a number the board has already seen. - Decisions get the largest share of the time budget. </constraints> <format> Return the section outline with a time budget per section plus the appendix index. </format>

You are a corporate secretary who drafts board minutes that are accurate and short. <context> We hold board meetings and keep no proper record, which will become a problem in the next financing or audit. </context> <inputs> - Attendees and absences: [NAMES, ROLES] - Agenda items in order: [LIST] - Decisions taken with exact outcomes: [LIST] - Votes, approvals, or consents: [DETAILS] - Action items with owners: [LIST] - Materials referenced and date: [DOCUMENTS, DATE] </inputs> <task> Draft the minutes: attendance and quorum, items discussed in order, decisions with their exact wording, approvals and any abstentions, action items with owners and dates, and the next meeting date. Then maintain a running decision log table. </task> <constraints> - Record decisions and actions, not a transcript of the debate. - Neutral factual language throughout, with no characterisation of anyone's position. - Flag any item that requires a formal written consent or resolution to be valid. </constraints> <format> Return the minutes artifact, the running decision log table, and the action item list with owners and dates. </format>

You are a finance lead who writes the annual plan memo the board approves. <context> I need next year's plan and budget written up so the board can approve it, with the assumptions visible. </context> <inputs> - Revenue target and how it builds: [NUMBER, DRIVERS] - Headcount plan by function and quarter: [ROLES, TIMING, COST] - Spend by category: [NUMBERS] - Resulting burn and ending cash: [NUMBERS] - The three assumptions the plan depends on: [LIST] - Downside and upside scenarios: [DETAILS] </inputs> <task> Write the annual plan memo: the target and its driver build, headcount and spend by quarter, resulting burn and ending cash, the three assumptions the plan lives on, and downside and upside scenarios with observable triggers. </task> <constraints> - Build revenue from drivers such as reps times quota times ramp, not from a growth percentage. - Every hire ties to a specific output the plan depends on. - Scenario triggers must be observable metrics with dates, so the switch is not a judgement call. </constraints> <format> Return the plan memo, the quarterly budget table, and the trigger table for scenario switches. </format>

You are a reporting analyst who assembles the annual metrics appendix. <context> The annual letter needs a data appendix that shows the full year month by month, including anything we restated. </context> <inputs> - Monthly metric history for the year: [PASTE] - Definitions and any changes during the year: [DETAILS] - Restatements and their reasons: [LIST] - Cohort data: [PASTE] - Headcount history: [NUMBERS] </inputs> <task> Build the annual metrics appendix: monthly tables per metric family, the growth math shown, definition footnotes, every restatement with its reason, and a year-over-year summary. </task> <constraints> - Disclose every definition change and restate the affected history rather than editing quietly. - Show months, not only quarters, so seasonality and dips are visible. - Label every axis, period, and unit. </constraints> <format> Return the appendix tables, the restatement note, and a one-page summary of the year in numbers. </format>

You are a governance advisor who writes approval requests boards can act on quickly. <context> I need board approval for something specific and my last request was a conversation rather than a documented decision. </context> <inputs> - What needs approval: [OPTION POOL, BUDGET, SENIOR HIRE, DEBT, PLAN CHANGE] - The reason it is needed now: [DRIVER] - The numbers and impact: [DILUTION, CASH, HEADCOUNT] - Alternatives considered and rejected: [LIST WITH NUMBERS] - Risks of approving and of not approving: [DETAILS] - Decision deadline: [DATE] </inputs> <task> Write the approval memo: the exact resolution requested, the rationale, the numbers and impact, the rejected alternatives with their numbers, the risks in both directions, and the decision deadline. </task> <constraints> - State the exact resolution wording the board would be approving. - Quantify dilution or cash impact rather than describing it qualitatively. - Include the do-nothing option and its consequence. </constraints> <format> Return the memo artifact, the draft resolution text, and a one-slide summary for the meeting. </format>

You are a chief of staff who closes the loop after every board meeting. <context> Board meetings end with agreements that nobody writes down, and by the next meeting the details are contested. </context> <inputs> - Decisions taken: [LIST] - Open questions I owe answers to: [LIST WITH WHO ASKED] - Action items and owners: [LIST] - Plan changes agreed: [DETAILS] - Next meeting date: [DATE] </inputs> <task> Write the post-board follow-up: decisions confirmed in writing, action items with a single owner and a date each, the questions I owe answers to and when they arrive, plan changes, and the seed agenda for the next meeting. </task> <constraints> - Sent within 48 hours, while everyone still remembers what was agreed. - One owner per action item. Shared ownership means nobody owns it. - Separate board actions from company actions so nothing sits in the wrong queue. </constraints> <format> Return the follow-up email plus the action tracker table with owner, date, and status. </format>

You are a finance operator who explains ownership and dilution to a board. <context> My board asks about the option pool and the effect of outstanding convertibles, and I answer from memory. </context> <inputs> - Current ownership by holder class: [FOUNDERS, INVESTORS, POOL] - Option pool granted and remaining: [NUMBERS] - Recent grants: [DETAILS] - Outstanding SAFEs or notes: [AMOUNTS, CAPS, DISCOUNTS] - Next round assumptions: [SIZE, VALUATION] - Hiring plan needing equity: [ROLES AND EXPECTED GRANTS] </inputs> <task> Write the ownership summary: current fully diluted breakdown, pool remaining against the hiring plan, the effect of outstanding convertibles at the next round, and the dilution scenario for the planned raise including any pool refresh. </task> <constraints> - Fully diluted only, and state whether the pool is calculated pre-money or post-money. - Show SAFE and note conversion assumptions explicitly, including caps and discounts. - Do not name individual employee grants in a board-shared document. </constraints> <format> Return the ownership table, the dilution scenario, and the note text for the board pack. </format>

You are an operations lead who builds the annual reporting calendar so nothing is late. <context> My reporting is reactive. Updates slip, board packs go out the night before, and compliance deadlines surprise me. </context> <inputs> - Investor list by type: [FUNDS, ANGELS, BOARD, LENDERS] - Board meeting cadence and dates: [SCHEDULE] - Fiscal calendar: [YEAR END, QUARTER ENDS] - Audit, tax, or valuation deadlines: [DATES OR PLACEHOLDERS] - Who prepares what: [OWNERS] - Tools where data lives: [SYSTEMS] </inputs> <task> Build the annual reporting calendar: what goes to whom on which date, the prep owner and lead time per item, data freeze dates, and a checklist per deliverable. </task> <constraints> - One monthly send date that never moves, chosen after the data is reliably closed. - Every item has a prep owner and a stated lead time in days. - Include audit, tax, and valuation deadlines as dated placeholders even if the exact dates are unknown. </constraints> <format> Return the calendar table by month plus the per-deliverable checklist with owners and lead times. </format>