30 Claude Prompts for Media Buyers

You are a media buyer responsible for turning approved briefs into placement plans. <context> I have an approved campaign brief and now need a concrete placement plan naming actual channels and formats before I start reaching out to vendors. </context> <inputs> - Approved brief summary: [PASTE BRIEF SUMMARY] - Total budget: [BUDGET AMOUNT] - Priority channels: [LIST CHANNELS] - Geographic markets: [LIST MARKETS] - Flight dates: [START DATE] to [END DATE] </inputs> <task> Produce a placement plan listing specific channel and format combinations, for example "YouTube pre-roll" or "programmatic display native," with a recommended budget allocation and rationale for each line. </task> <constraints> Every line item must tie back to a stated priority channel and market. Do not exceed the total budget across all lines. Flag any line item that depends on inventory we have not yet confirmed availability for. </constraints> <format> Table with columns: Channel/Format, Market, Budget Allocation, Rationale, Availability Risk. </format>

You are a platform specialist who advises on ad format selection within a single media platform. <context> We have budget committed to one platform and I need help deciding which ad formats on that platform will perform best for this objective. </context> <inputs> - Platform: [PLATFORM NAME] - Budget for this platform: [BUDGET AMOUNT] - Campaign objective: [OBJECTIVE, , LEADS, CONVERSIONS] - Audience being targeted: [DESCRIBE AUDIENCE] - Creative assets already available: [LIST ASSET TYPES] </inputs> <task> Recommend a mix of ad formats available on the named platform, with a percent of budget for each format, and explain why each format suits the stated objective given the creative assets we already have. </task> <constraints> Only recommend formats that actually exist on the named platform, do not invent format names. If a recommended format requires a creative asset type we do not have listed, flag it as a production gap. </constraints> <format> Table with columns: Format, Budget Percent, Why It Fits, Production Gap (if any). </format>

You are a media buyer planning a campaign that runs in multiple phases. <context> This campaign has distinct phases, for example awareness then consideration then conversion, and I need to sequence which placements run in which phase. </context> <inputs> - Total flight length: [NUMBER] weeks - Number of phases: [NUMBER] - Objective per phase: [LIST OBJECTIVE FOR EACH PHASE] - Available channels: [LIST CHANNELS] - Total budget: [BUDGET AMOUNT] </inputs> <task> Build a phase-by-phase sequencing plan showing which channels are active in each phase, what percent of the total budget each phase gets, and how messaging should shift between phases. </task> <constraints> Budget percentages across all phases must add to 100. Do not run every channel in every phase, sequencing means some channels turn on or off between phases. Keep messaging shift notes to one sentence per phase. </constraints> <format> One section per phase with headers: Phase Name, Weeks, Active Channels, Budget Percent, Messaging Shift. </format>

You are a media buyer who reviews vendor placement proposals before approving spend. <context> A vendor sent me a placement package proposal and I need an honest evaluation of whether it fits our brief before I sign off on it. </context> <inputs> - Vendor's proposed package details: [PASTE VENDOR PROPOSAL] - Our budget ceiling for this vendor: [BUDGET AMOUNT] - Our campaign objective: [OBJECTIVE] - Our target audience: [DESCRIBE AUDIENCE] </inputs> <task> Evaluate the vendor's proposal against our objective, audience fit, and budget ceiling. Identify any part of the package that is padded, misaligned with the audience, or priced above what similar inventory typically costs. </task> <constraints> Be direct about weaknesses, do not soften a bad fit to be polite. Do not recommend rejecting the whole package if only one line item is the problem, isolate the issue. </constraints> <format> Return: Overall Fit Verdict (one sentence), Strong Elements, Weak or Padded Elements, Specific Renegotiation Points. </format>

You are a media buyer preparing a contingency plan in case a campaign underdelivers midflight. <context> I want a contingency placement plan ready before launch so that if a channel underdelivers partway through, I already know what to shift budget toward instead of scrambling. </context> <inputs> - Primary placement plan: [PASTE PLACEMENT PLAN OR SUMMARY] - Underdelivery trigger threshold: [DETAILS] - Backup channels available: [LIST BACKUP CHANNELS] - Remaining budget flexibility: [PERCENT OR AMOUNT THAT CAN BE REALLOCATED] </inputs> <task> Write a contingency plan specifying, for each primary channel, what backup channel to shift budget to if it hits the underdelivery trigger, and how much of the flexible budget to move. </task> <constraints> Only use the backup channels listed, do not suggest channels outside that list. Reallocation amounts must stay within the stated flexible budget limit. Keep each contingency rule to two sentences. </constraints> <format> Table with columns: Primary Channel, Trigger Condition, Backup Channel, Reallocation Amount, Notes. </format>

You are a media buyer responsible for managing creative fatigue across a live campaign. <context> We have a set of creative assets and I need a rotation schedule so no single ad runs long enough to fatigue the audience before the flight ends. </context> <inputs> - Number of creative assets available: [NUMBER] - Flight length: [NUMBER] weeks - Channel this rotation runs on: [CHANNEL NAME] - Estimated frequency cap per user: [FREQUENCY CAP] - Any assets tied to specific dates or offers: [LIST DATE-LOCKED ASSETS, OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Build a week-by-week rotation schedule assigning which creative assets are live each week, ensuring no asset runs for the entire flight uninterrupted and date-locked assets appear only in their correct week. </task> <constraints> No single asset should run more than [MAX CONSECUTIVE WEEKS] consecutive weeks without a rest week. Respect the frequency cap when deciding how many assets need to be live concurrently. Do not schedule a date-locked asset outside its required week. </constraints> <format> Table with columns: Week, Live Assets, Resting Assets, Notes. </format>

You are a media buyer who runs structured creative tests instead of guessing which ad wins. <context> Before this campaign launches I want a set of testable hypotheses for the creative variations we are running, so the results actually tell us something afterward. </context> <inputs> - Creative variations being tested: [DESCRIBE EACH VARIATION] - Primary metric we will judge by: [METRIC, , CVR, CPA] - Audience segment being tested on: [DESCRIBE AUDIENCE] - Test duration: [NUMBER] days </inputs> <task> Write one clear hypothesis per creative variation stating what we expect to happen and why, based on what differs about that variation. Also state the minimum sample size or spend needed before we can trust a result on the primary metric. </task> <constraints> Each hypothesis must name the specific variable being tested, not just "this creative will do better." Do not claim statistical confidence is possible without stating the volume needed to reach it. </constraints> <format> One entry per variation: Variation Name, Hypothesis, Variable Being Tested, Minimum Volume Needed to Trust Result. </format>

You are a media buyer reviewing midflight creative performance to decide what to change. <context> We are midway through a flight and I have performance data per creative asset. I need a clear read on what to keep, pause, or refresh before the next reporting period. </context> <inputs> - Performance data per creative: [PASTE METRICS TABLE OR SUMMARY] - Primary KPI: [KPI] - Days remaining in flight: [NUMBER] - Budget remaining: [AMOUNT] </inputs> <task> Review the performance data and recommend which creative assets to keep as is, which to pause, and which show early fatigue signs and need refreshing, based specifically on the primary KPI. </task> <constraints> Base every recommendation on the actual numbers given, do not recommend pausing an asset with too little data to judge, call that out as inconclusive instead. Do not recommend changes that would need more days than remain in the flight to show results. </constraints> <format> Table with columns: Creative Asset, Verdict (Keep/Pause/Refresh/Inconclusive), Reason, Action Needed This Week. </format>

You are a media buyer who writes creative refresh briefs for the design team when an asset starts fatiguing. <context> An ad asset is fatiguing and I need to brief the design team on a refreshed version that keeps what worked but changes what likely caused the fatigue. </context> <inputs> - Original creative description: [DESCRIBE ORIGINAL CREATIVE] - Performance signal that triggered the refresh: [DETAILS] - Element suspected of causing fatigue: [, VISUAL, OFFER] - Brand guardrails that cannot change: [LIST GUARDRAILS] </inputs> <task> Write a creative refresh brief for the design team specifying what to keep from the original, what to change based on the suspected fatigue cause, and what guardrails they must respect. </task> <constraints> Do not suggest changing more than the one suspected fatigue element plus minor supporting adjustments, a full redesign defeats the purpose of a fast refresh. Every guardrail listed must appear in the brief verbatim. </constraints> <format> Return: What to Keep, What to Change (and why), Guardrails, Turnaround Needed. </format>

You are a media buyer managing creative rotation for a campaign targeting several distinct audience segments at once. <context> This campaign targets multiple audience segments and I need to decide which creative variants go to which segment rather than showing the same rotation to everyone. </context> <inputs> - Audience segments: [LIST SEGMENTS] - Creative variants available: [DESCRIBE EACH VARIANT] - Channel: [CHANNEL NAME] - Any segment-specific offers or restrictions: [LIST, OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Map which creative variants should run for each audience segment, explaining why each variant fits that segment's likely motivations, and flag any variant that should not run for a given segment due to a listed restriction. </task> <constraints> Do not assign every variant to every segment by default, make an actual match based on fit. Respect all stated segment-specific restrictions without exception. </constraints> <format> Table with columns: Segment, Assigned Variants, Rationale, Restricted Variants (if any). </format>

You are a media buyer negotiating rates directly with publisher sales representatives. <context> A publisher sent me an initial rate card for inventory I want, and I need to send a counter that gets a better rate without damaging the relationship, since we may need this publisher again. </context> <inputs> - Publisher's initial rate: [RATE OFFERED] - Target rate I want: [TARGET RATE] - Committed spend level I can offer: [SPEND AMOUNT] - Negotiating strengths I have: [, COMPETITOR RATES, VOLUME] </inputs> <task> Write a counter-offer email that opens warmly, states the target rate clearly, and backs it with the strengths given, without sounding like a threat to walk away. </task> <constraints> Keep the email under 150 words. Do not bluff with strengths not listed. Tone should be collaborative, not adversarial, we want to keep working with this publisher long term. </constraints> <format> Return as a ready-to-send email with a subject line and signoff placeholder [YOUR NAME]. </format>

You are a media buyer preparing for a live negotiation call with a vendor account manager. <context> I have a call scheduled with a vendor to negotiate terms and I want talking points prepared so I do not get outmaneuvered on the call. </context> <inputs> - What the vendor is currently offering: [CURRENT OFFER TERMS] - What we actually need: [OUR REQUIRED TERMS] - Vendor's likely objections based on past calls: [LIST LIKELY OBJECTIONS] - Our walk-away point: [WALK AWAY CONDITION] </inputs> <task> Prepare talking points for the call including an opening statement, a response to each likely objection, and a clear signal for when to invoke the walk-away point. </task> <constraints> Each objection response must be a specific reply, not a generic negotiation tactic. Do not suggest revealing the walk-away point early in the call. Keep the whole set of talking points to one page. </constraints> <format> Return: Opening Statement, Objection Responses (one per listed objection), Walk-Away Signal, Closing Statement. </format>

You are a media buyer comparing competing vendor proposals for the same inventory need. <context> Multiple vendors sent proposals for the same type of inventory and I need a clear comparison to decide who to go with, beyond just the lowest sticker price. </context> <inputs> - Vendor A proposal: [PASTE PROPOSAL A] - Vendor B proposal: [PASTE PROPOSAL B] - Vendor C proposal (if applicable): [PASTE PROPOSAL C, OR NONE] - What matters most to us: [PRIORITY SUCH AS CPM, AUDIENCE MATCH, OR ADDED VALUE] </inputs> <task> Compare the vendor proposals against the stated priority, accounting for total value including any added value or bonus placements, not just headline price. Recommend which vendor to choose and what to still push back on with the chosen vendor. </task> <constraints> Do not default to the cheapest option if it does not serve the stated priority. Note any hidden cost or vague term in any proposal explicitly. Skip vendor C entirely if marked N/A. </constraints> <format> Comparison table (Vendor, Effective CPM, Added Value, Concerns) followed by a Recommendation paragraph and a Remaining Pushback Points list. </format>

You are a media buyer who has received notice of a rate increase from an existing vendor partner. <context> A vendor we already work with just told me they are raising rates for our renewal, and I need to push back firmly while keeping the relationship intact since we plan to keep buying from them. </context> <inputs> - Vendor's proposed new rate: [NEW RATE] - Our previous rate: [OLD RATE] - Our historical spend with this vendor: [SPEND HISTORY] - Reason given for the increase: [VENDORS STATED REASON] </inputs> <task> Write an email pushing back on the increase that references our spend history as evidence of a strong partnership, questions the stated reason if it seems weak, and proposes a smaller increase or a phased approach instead of flat rejection. </task> <constraints> Do not threaten to leave unless that is genuinely on the table, keep the tone firm but not hostile. Reference the specific spend history and old rate given, not vague loyalty language. </constraints> <format> Return as a ready-to-send email with subject line and a placeholder signoff [YOUR NAME]. </format>

You are a media buyer setting up terms for a brand new vendor relationship with no negotiation history to lean on. <context> This is our first campaign with a new vendor and I want to propose fair opening terms that protect us without scaring off a partner we might want to keep for future campaigns. </context> <inputs> - Type of inventory or service: [DESCRIBE INVENTORY/SERVICE] - Budget for this first engagement: [BUDGET AMOUNT] - Performance guarantees we want, if any: [LIST DESIRED GUARANTEES, OR NONE] - Payment terms our finance team requires: [PAYMENT TERMS] </inputs> <task> Draft opening negotiation terms covering pricing structure, any performance guarantees we want, payment terms, and a cancellation or make-good clause appropriate for a first-time relationship. </task> <constraints> Keep the ask reasonable for a first engagement, do not open with terms only an established partner would grant. Include the exact payment terms given without softening them. State the make-good clause in plain terms, not legal boilerplate. </constraints> <format> Return: Pricing Structure, Performance Guarantees, Payment Terms, Cancellation/Make-Good Clause, Notes for Internal Legal Review. </format>

You are a media buyer who writes post-campaign performance reports for clients. <context> The campaign just ended and I have raw metrics exported from our ad platforms. I need to turn that into a report the client can actually read without a media background. </context> <inputs> - Raw metrics data: [PASTE METRICS DATA] - Original campaign goal: [GOAL] - Total budget spent: [AMOUNT] - Client's biggest question going in: [CLIENT QUESTION] </inputs> <task> Write a post-campaign report that answers the client's biggest question directly up front, then walks through performance against the original goal, key wins, and areas that underperformed, all in plain language. </task> <constraints> Lead with the answer to the client's question, do not bury it in a summary at the end. Avoid platform jargon like "CTR" without explaining what it means in plain terms the first time it appears. Do not inflate underperformance as a win. </constraints> <format> Return: Direct Answer to Client's Question, Performance vs Goal, Key Wins, Areas That Underperformed, What We Recommend Next. </format>

You are a media buyer conducting an honest internal post-mortem after a campaign fell short. <context> This campaign missed its target and before we report out externally I want an honest internal post-mortem so we do not repeat the same mistake on the next campaign. </context> <inputs> - Original target: [TARGET] - Actual result: [ACTUAL RESULT] - Campaign timeline and key decisions made: [PASTE TIMELINE/DECISIONS] - Constraints we were operating under: [LIST CONSTRAINTS, , BUDGET CUTS] </inputs> <task> Write an internal post-mortem identifying the most likely reasons the campaign missed its target, distinguishing between mistakes we could control and constraints we could not, and specific changes to make on the next campaign. </task> <constraints> Be honest even where it is uncomfortable, do not soften internal findings the way you would for a client. Separate controllable mistakes from external constraints clearly, do not blame constraints for a controllable mistake. </constraints> <format> Return: What We Targeted vs What Happened, Controllable Mistakes, External Constraints, Specific Changes for Next Time. </format>

You are a media buyer who documents learnings so they carry forward into future campaign plans. <context> This campaign is done and rather than let the learnings disappear, I want them written up in a form the planning team can reference when building the next brief for this client. </context> <inputs> - What worked well: [PASTE RESULTS/OBSERVATIONS THAT WORKED] - What did not work: [PASTE RESULTS/OBSERVATIONS THAT DID NOT WORK] - Client industry: [INDUSTRY] - Channels used: [LIST CHANNELS] </inputs> <task> Write a learnings summary organized by channel, stating what to repeat and what to avoid on the next plan for this client, specific enough that someone who was not on this campaign could apply it. </task> <constraints> Tie every learning to the specific channel it applies to, do not write generic learnings that could apply to any campaign. Keep each learning to one or two sentences. </constraints> <format> One section per channel with two lists: Repeat Next Time, Avoid Next Time. </format>

You are a media buyer preparing a quarterly performance summary for agency leadership. <context> Leadership wants a short summary of how our media campaigns performed this quarter across clients, not a deep dive into any single campaign. </context> <inputs> - Campaigns run this quarter with key results: [PASTE LIST OF CAMPAIGNS AND RESULTS] - Total media spend managed: [TOTAL SPEND] - Notable win: [DESCRIBE BIGGEST WIN] - Notable challenge: [DESCRIBE BIGGEST CHALLENGE] </inputs> <task> Write an executive summary covering overall performance across the listed campaigns, highlighting the notable win and challenge given, and one forward-looking priority for next quarter. </task> <constraints> Keep the whole summary to half a page, leadership does not need campaign-level detail. Do not list every campaign individually, group by trend or theme instead. State the forward-looking priority as one specific action, not a vague goal. </constraints> <format> Return: Quarter Overview (2 to 3 sentences), Notable Win, Notable Challenge, Priority for Next Quarter. </format>

You are a media buyer who needs to explain an unusual metric swing to a client before they ask about it. <context> A metric moved in a way that looks alarming on the surface but has a reasonable explanation, and I want to get ahead of it with the client before they see the dashboard and panic. </context> <inputs> - The metric that moved: [METRIC NAME] - The change: [DETAILS] - The actual cause we identified: [CAUSE, , SEASONAL DIP, TRACKING CHANGE] - Whether action is needed: [YES/NO, AND WHAT ACTION] </inputs> <task> Write a short proactive message to the client explaining the metric change, the real cause, and whether any action is being taken, in a tone that is reassuring without minimizing a real problem if one exists. </task> <constraints> Do not use vague reassurance like "nothing to worry about" without backing it with the actual cause. If action is needed, state it plainly rather than burying it. Keep the message under 120 words. </constraints> <format> Return as a ready-to-send message with a one-line subject and a placeholder signoff [YOUR NAME]. </format>

You are a media buyer troubleshooting a campaign that is pacing off its budget target midflight. <context> A campaign is either underspending or overspending against its planned pace and I need to figure out why before deciding how to fix it. </context> <inputs> - Planned pace vs actual pace: [PLANNED VS ACTUAL, , ACTUAL 30 PERCENT] - Days elapsed vs total flight days: [ELAPSED] of [TOTAL] - Any known changes during the flight: [LIST CHANGES, , BUDGET CAPS HIT, CREATIVE SWAPS, OR NONE] - Channel affected: [CHANNEL NAME] </inputs> <task> Diagnose the most likely reasons for the pacing gap given the known changes, and recommend the specific fix for each likely cause, ranked by how likely it is to be the actual cause. </task> <constraints> Do not recommend increasing bids or budget as a blanket fix without first identifying a likely cause, that risks masking the real problem. Rank causes from most to least likely based on the information given. </constraints> <format> Return: Pacing Gap Summary, Likely Causes (ranked, with reasoning), Recommended Fix per Cause. </format>

You are a media buyer deciding how to reallocate remaining budget across channels midflight based on performance so far. <context> We are partway through a flight and I have performance data by channel. I need a reallocation plan for the remaining budget that shifts money toward what is working. </context> <inputs> - Performance by channel so far: [PASTE CHANNEL PERFORMANCE DATA] - Remaining budget: [AMOUNT] - Days remaining in flight: [NUMBER] - Primary KPI: [KPI] </inputs> <task> Recommend how to reallocate the remaining budget across channels based on performance against the primary KPI, including how much to shift and from which channel to which. </task> <constraints> Do not fully defund a channel with too little data to judge fairly, flag it as inconclusive instead. Any shift larger than 30 percent of a channel's original allocation needs a one-sentence justification. Stay within the total remaining budget. </constraints> <format> Table with columns: Channel, Current Allocation, Recommended Allocation, Change, Justification. </format>

You are a media buyer setting up a pacing tracker to monitor a campaign daily through its flight. <context> I want a simple daily pacing tracker structure I can fill in each day to catch pacing problems early instead of discovering them at the weekly check-in. </context> <inputs> - Flight length: [NUMBER] days - Total budget: [AMOUNT] - Channels being tracked: [LIST CHANNELS] - Pacing tolerance before flagging an issue: [DETAILS] </inputs> <task> Design a daily pacing tracker template with the fields needed to catch pacing issues early, including a clear rule for when a day's numbers should trigger a flag based on the stated tolerance. </task> <constraints> Keep the template to fields that can realistically be filled in daily without pulling a full report, no more than six fields per channel. State the flagging rule as a simple, unambiguous condition. </constraints> <format> Return: Template Fields (list per channel), Flagging Rule (one sentence), Example Filled Row. </format>

You are a media buyer requesting additional budget from a client partway through a campaign that is performing well. <context> The campaign is outperforming expectations and I want to ask the client for additional budget to capitalize on it while the flight is still live, not after it ends. </context> <inputs> - Performance data supporting the request: [PASTE PERFORMANCE DATA] - Additional budget being requested: [AMOUNT] - Days remaining in flight: [NUMBER] - What the additional budget would specifically be used for: [DESCRIBE USE] </inputs> <task> Write a budget increase request to the client that leads with the performance data as evidence, states exactly what the additional budget buys, and creates urgency around the days remaining without being pushy. </task> <constraints> Every claim must be backed by the performance data given, do not project results beyond what the data supports. State the specific use of funds plainly, not "more of the same." Keep the request under 150 words. </constraints> <format> Return as a ready-to-send email with subject line and placeholder signoff [YOUR NAME]. </format>

You are a media buyer forecasting how a campaign will finish based on performance so far. <context> The client keeps asking how the campaign is going to end up and I want a forecast based on current pacing rather than a guess, so I can set expectations correctly now. </context> <inputs> - Performance to date: [PASTE PERFORMANCE DATA TO DATE] - Days elapsed vs total flight days: [ELAPSED] of [TOTAL] - Known upcoming changes: [LIST CHANGES, , BUDGET INCREASE APPROVED, OR NONE] - Primary KPI being forecast: [KPI] </inputs> <task> Forecast the likely end-of-flight result for the primary KPI based on current pacing, adjusted for any known upcoming changes, and state the confidence level of the forecast given how much data exists so far. </task> <constraints> State the forecast as a realistic range, not a single precise number. Explicitly note how the known upcoming changes affect the forecast direction. Do not claim high confidence early in the flight with limited data. </constraints> <format> Return: Current Pace Summary, Forecast Range for [KPI], Impact of Upcoming Changes, Confidence Level and Why. </format>