Claude Prompts for Job Descriptions That Attract Right Candidates

[Paste hiring manager's rough notes about the role]. Write a structured JD. Output as XML: <role-summary>, <responsibilities-day-to-day>, <responsibilities-quarter>, <required-experience>, <preferred-experience>, <success-after-90-days>, <success-after-1-year>, <reporting-structure>, <compensation-range>, <work-style>, <growth-path>. Specific over generic.

Define success at 90 days + 1 year for [role]. Output: 90-day measurable outcomes (specific deliverables / relationships built / understanding gained), 1-year measurable outcomes (impact, capabilities developed, scope expansion). Outcomes-based not activities-based — what changes in the world if they succeed.

[Paste my current required + preferred lists]. Critique: which "required" items are actually preferred? Which "preferred" items are actually required if I'm honest? What am I missing? Goal: tight required list (otherwise I lose qualified candidates), generous preferred list (signal range without filtering).

I'm hiring [role] at [company stage / size]. The same role is different at startup vs scale-up vs enterprise. Help me write JD that signals scope correctly: budget responsibility, team size, decision authority, ambiguity tolerance, generalist-vs-specialist orientation. Filter mismatched candidates upfront.

[Paste JD]. Audit for biased or exclusionary language. Flag: gendered terms (rockstar, ninja, guru), age-coded language (digital native, energetic), ableist phrasing (must stand for X hours unless essential), academic-credentialism unnecessary for role, jargon excluding outsiders, unrealistic year requirements. Suggest replacements.

JD requires [X years experience]. Pressure-test: is this real (skill takes that long) or copy-paste from old JDs? What can substitute (e.g., 3 years + advanced cert = 5 years)? Drop unrealistic requirements that gate-keep without justification. Junior candidates with right skills > 7-year mediocre.

Help me draft the comp range for [role] at [company]. Considerations: market data, internal equity, candidate seek-rate at different bands. Output: range to publish, rationale for top vs bottom of range, what variable comp + equity I should mention, language framing the range honestly.

[Paste JD]. Convert into structured interview rubric: required competencies, behaviors that demonstrate each at level, sample interview questions per competency, what passing answer looks like, what failing answer looks like, scoring scale (1-4) with anchors. Exportable as XML for ATS.

[Paste JD]. Design a take-home assignment that tests the actual job. Constraints: under 4 hours of candidate time, simulates real work (not trick puzzle), evaluatable against rubric, doesn't exploit free labor. Output assignment brief, evaluation criteria, time guidance.

[Paste JD]. Generate reference check questions tailored to this role. Output: 8-10 specific questions on competencies that JD lists, calibration questions ("what stretch did you see them grow into?"), red flag questions ("what would have been their ideal next role you didn't have to offer them?"). Beyond verifying employment.

[Paste internal JD]. Adapt for external posting. Different from internal: more company context, more "why this role matters," compelling opener, role intrigue + transparency, less internal jargon, application instructions clear, EEO statement. Internal docs assume context external candidates don't have.

[Paste external JD]. Variant for LinkedIn: shorter (150-250 words), conversational opener, problem-led framing ("we have X problem; you solve it"), 3 bullets max for requirements, single clear CTA. LinkedIn scrolls past 5 pages of corporate JD.

Internal posting for [role]. Existing employees can apply. Output: how internal candidates are evaluated (vs external), encouraged candidate profiles, what current managers should support, application timeline + transparency, who's on hiring committee, how non-selected internal candidates will be supported afterward.

[Paste JD that's been open 60+ days]. Help me assess: is the JD itself the problem? Audit: realistic for talent market, comp competitive, requirements over-engineered, role narrative compelling, company perception. Sometimes the JD is broken; opening longer doesn't fix it.