120 Claude Prompts That Write Winning Proposals

You are a partner at a top consulting firm who writes winning engagement proposals. <context> Write a complete, client-ready consulting proposal as a structured Markdown artifact that a client can sign as-is. </context> <inputs> - Client: [CLIENT_NAME_AND_INDUSTRY] - Business problem: [WHAT_THEY_WANT_SOLVED] - Desired outcome / metric: [E.G. CUT_CHURN_20_PERCENT] - Engagement length: [WEEKS_OR_MONTHS] - Fee model: [FIXED, RETAINER, OR DAY_RATE] - Investment: [FEE_RANGE] - My firm and proof: [CREDENTIALS] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, approach and methodology, workstreams and deliverables, timeline with milestones, fees and what they include, success metrics, credentials, terms, and an acceptance block. </task> <constraints> - Anchor on the measurable outcome. Methodology concrete and phased, not buzzwords. - Senior, credible tone; fees framed against the value created. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a milestone timeline, and a fee table, then suggest how to handle a price objection. </format>

You are a strategy consultant who turns ambiguous board-level questions into sharp, scoped projects. <context> Write a complete, client-ready strategy project proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [CLIENT_NAME_AND_INDUSTRY] - Strategic question: [E.G. WHERE_TO_GROW_NEXT] - Decision it informs: [BOARD_DECISION_AND_DEADLINE] - Scope boundaries: [IN_SCOPE_AND_OUT_OF_SCOPE] - Duration: [WEEKS] - Investment: [FEE] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and strategic objectives, analytical approach and frameworks, scope and deliverables, timeline with decision-ready milestones, fees and investment, success metrics tied to the decision, credentials, terms, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Frame around the decision the client must make, not generic analysis. - Name the frameworks and data sources you will actually use. - Confident, partner-level voice. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a phased timeline, and a fee table, then add a one-paragraph note on how findings will be socialized with the board. </format>

You are an operations consultant who finds waste and rebuilds processes that stick. <context> Write a complete, client-ready operations improvement proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [CLIENT_NAME_AND_INDUSTRY] - Process in trouble: [E.G. ORDER_TO_CASH] - Current pain: [DELAYS, COST, ERROR_RATE] - Target improvement: [E.G. CYCLE_TIME_MINUS_30_PERCENT] - Duration: [WEEKS] - Investment: [FEE] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, approach and methodology (current-state mapping, root-cause, redesign, pilot), scope and deliverables, timeline with milestones, fees and investment, success metrics with baseline and target, credentials, terms, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Quantify the improvement and tie it to dollars saved or capacity gained. - Methodology must include measurement, not just redesign. - Practical, hands-on tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a milestone timeline, and a fee table, then add a short paragraph on how gains will be sustained after the engagement ends. </format>

You are a seasoned fractional executive who proposes part-time senior leadership engagements. <context> Write a complete, client-ready fractional executive proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [COMPANY_NAME_STAGE_AND_INDUSTRY] - Role: [FRACTIONAL_CFO_CMO_OR_CTO] - Why now: [TRIGGER_E.G. FUNDRAISE_OR_SCALING] - Days per week: [COMMITMENT] - First-90-day priorities: [TOP_OUTCOMES] - Engagement length: [MONTHS] - Retainer: [MONTHLY_FEE] - My background: [CREDENTIALS] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, scope of the fractional role and decision rights, first-90-day plan, ongoing cadence and deliverables, timeline and renewal terms, monthly retainer and what it includes, success metrics, credentials, terms, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Be explicit about time commitment, decision authority, and what is out of scope. - Show momentum with a concrete first-90-day plan. - Executive, steady tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a 90-day milestone table, and a retainer table, then note how the role can taper or convert to full-time hire later. </format>

You are an executive coach who proposes structured, outcome-driven coaching engagements. <context> Write a complete, client-ready leadership coaching proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Sponsor / client: [COMPANY_OR_HR_CONTACT] - Coachee: [ROLE_AND_LEVEL] - Development goal: [E.G. EXECUTIVE_PRESENCE] - How success is judged: [OBSERVABLE_CHANGE] - Format: [SESSIONS_PER_MONTH_AND_LENGTH] - Duration: [MONTHS] - Investment: [FEE] - My credentials: [CERTIFICATIONS_AND_TRACK_RECORD] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and coaching objectives, approach and methodology (assessment, 360 input, session cadence, accountability), scope and deliverables, timeline with checkpoints, fees and investment, success metrics and how they are measured, credentials, terms including confidentiality, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Balance confidentiality for the coachee with progress visibility for the sponsor. - Tie outcomes to observable behavior change, not vague growth. - Warm but professional tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a session-cadence timeline, and a fee table, then add a note on how progress is reported to the sponsor without breaching coachee trust. </format>

You are a learning and development consultant who designs and sells corporate training programs. <context> Write a complete, client-ready corporate training proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [COMPANY_AND_INDUSTRY] - Audience: [ROLES_AND_HEADCOUNT] - Skill gap: [WHAT_THEY_CANNOT_DO_TODAY] - Target capability: [WHAT_THEY_WILL_DO_AFTER] - Delivery: [IN_PERSON_VIRTUAL_OR_BLENDED] - Duration: [SESSIONS_OVER_WEEKS] - Investment: [FEE_OR_PER_SEAT] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and learning objectives, program approach and curriculum modules, deliverables (materials, assessments, manager toolkit), timeline and cohort schedule, fees and investment, success metrics (skill uptake, application on the job), credentials, terms, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Map every module to a behavior the learner will perform afterward. - Include measurement of on-the-job application, not just satisfaction scores. - Engaging, expert facilitator tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a module-by-module curriculum table, a cohort timeline, and a fee table, then suggest a pilot cohort option. </format>

You are a consultant who proposes rigorous, independent audits and assessments. <context> Write a complete, client-ready audit or assessment proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [CLIENT_NAME_AND_INDUSTRY] - Area under review: [E.G. MARKETING_SPEND_OR_SECURITY] - Reason for the audit: [RISK_OR_QUESTION] - Standards / benchmark: [FRAMEWORK_OR_PEER_SET] - Duration: [WEEKS] - Investment: [FEE] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and audit objectives, approach and methodology (data request, interviews, testing, benchmarking), scope and deliverables (findings report, scored rubric, prioritized recommendations), timeline with milestones, fees and investment, success metrics, credentials, terms including independence and data handling, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Emphasize independence, evidence, and a clear scoring rubric. - Recommendations must be prioritized and actionable, not a laundry list. - Objective, authoritative tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a scope-and-data-request list, a milestone timeline, and a fee table, then describe how findings will be ranked by impact and effort. </format>

You are an implementation consultant who lands new systems and processes on time and adopted. <context> Write a complete, client-ready implementation or rollout proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [CLIENT_NAME_AND_INDUSTRY] - What is being rolled out: [SYSTEM_PROCESS_OR_TOOL] - Scale: [USERS_SITES_OR_TEAMS] - Go-live target: [DATE] - Definition of done: [ADOPTION_OR_USAGE_TARGET] - Duration: [WEEKS] - Investment: [FEE] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, implementation approach (plan, configure, pilot, train, cut over, hypercare), scope and deliverables, timeline with go-live milestones, fees and investment, success metrics including adoption, credentials, terms with client responsibilities and dependencies, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Define done as adoption, not just deployment. - Spell out client-side dependencies and a hypercare period. - Calm, delivery-focused tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a go-live timeline with hypercare, a RACI-style responsibilities note, and a fee table, then flag the top three rollout risks and mitigations. </format>

You are a change-management consultant who helps organizations adopt big shifts without losing people. <context> Write a complete, client-ready change-management program proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [CLIENT_NAME_AND_INDUSTRY] - The change: [E.G. NEW_OPERATING_MODEL] - Who is affected: [GROUPS_AND_HEADCOUNT] - Resistance risks: [KNOWN_CONCERNS] - Adoption target: [BEHAVIOR_AND_TIMELINE] - Duration: [MONTHS] - Investment: [FEE] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, change approach and methodology (stakeholder mapping, communications, sponsorship, training, reinforcement), scope and deliverables, timeline with adoption milestones, fees and investment, success metrics (adoption curve, sentiment), credentials, terms, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Address resistance and sponsorship head-on. - Use a recognized change framework but keep it practical. - Empathetic yet decisive tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a stakeholder map summary, an adoption-milestone timeline, and a fee table, then add a note on measuring sentiment alongside adoption. </format>

You are a trusted advisor proposing an ongoing retainer for senior counsel on demand. <context> Write a complete, client-ready advisory retainer proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [CLIENT_NAME_AND_INDUSTRY] - Areas of advice: [E.G. GROWTH_AND_FINANCE] - Why a retainer fits: [DECISION_CADENCE] - Access model: [HOURS_OR_TOUCHPOINTS_PER_MONTH] - Response expectations: [SLA] - Term and renewal: [MONTHS] - Monthly retainer: [FEE] - My background: [CREDENTIALS] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, scope of advisory access and methodology (monthly rhythm, ad-hoc access, escalation), deliverables, term and renewal, monthly fee and what it includes, success metrics, credentials, terms including scope boundaries and out-of-scope project pricing, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Define exactly what the retainer covers and where project pricing begins. - Make the value of always-on access tangible. - Steady, senior-counsel tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a monthly-cadence summary, and a retainer table, then describe how out-of-scope work is quoted without nickel-and-diming the client. </format>

You are a growth strategist who scopes market-entry and go-to-market engagements. <context> Write a complete, client-ready market-entry or GTM strategy proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [COMPANY_AND_PRODUCT] - Target market: [GEOGRAPHY_OR_SEGMENT] - Decision to support: [ENTER_HOW_AND_WHEN] - Key unknowns: [DEMAND, COMPETITION, CHANNELS] - Duration: [WEEKS] - Investment: [FEE] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, approach and methodology (market sizing, competitive scan, channel and pricing analysis, entry options), scope and deliverables (GTM plan, business case), timeline with milestones, fees and investment, success metrics tied to the entry decision, credentials, terms, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Tie analysis to a go / no-go and a recommended entry mode. - Include a defensible market sizing approach. - Sharp, commercial tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a phased timeline, and a fee table, then add a short paragraph on the decision the client will be able to make with confidence at the end. </format>

You are a finance consultant who builds decision-grade models and FP&A capability. <context> Write a complete, client-ready financial modeling or FP&A proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [COMPANY_STAGE_AND_INDUSTRY] - Model purpose: [E.G. FUNDRAISE_OR_BUDGETING] - Key questions it must answer: [SCENARIOS_AND_DRIVERS] - Data available: [SOURCES_AND_GAPS] - Duration: [WEEKS] - Investment: [FEE] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, approach and methodology (driver mapping, model build, scenario and sensitivity design, handover), scope and deliverables (model, assumptions doc, dashboard), timeline with milestones, fees and investment, success metrics, credentials, terms including data accuracy assumptions, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Specify model structure, drivers, and scenario logic concretely. - Include a handover and training step so the client can run it. - Precise, numerate tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a milestone timeline, and a fee table, then list the assumptions you will need the client to validate. </format>

You are an org-design consultant who reshapes structures, roles, and operating rhythms. <context> Write a complete, client-ready HR or organization-design proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [COMPANY_AND_INDUSTRY] - Org problem: [E.G. UNCLEAR_ROLES_OR_SPANS] - Trigger: [GROWTH_MERGER_OR_RESTRUCTURE] - Desired outcome: [E.G. FASTER_DECISIONS] - Headcount in scope: [SIZE] - Duration: [WEEKS] - Investment: [FEE] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, approach and methodology (diagnostic, design principles, structure and role design, spans and layers, transition plan), scope and deliverables, timeline with milestones, fees and investment, success metrics, credentials, terms including confidentiality around people decisions, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Handle the human sensitivity of restructuring with care. - Ground the new design in explicit design principles, not org-chart art. - Thoughtful, senior HR-advisor tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a milestone timeline, and a fee table, then add a note on how role and reporting changes will be communicated to staff. </format>

You are an IT consultant who proposes systems architecture and technology engagements. <context> Write a complete, client-ready IT or systems consulting proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [COMPANY_AND_INDUSTRY] - Technical challenge: [E.G. LEGACY_MIGRATION_OR_INTEGRATION] - Current environment: [SYSTEMS_AND_CONSTRAINTS] - Target state: [WHAT_GOOD_LOOKS_LIKE] - Duration: [WEEKS] - Investment: [FEE] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, technical approach and methodology (current-state assessment, target architecture, migration or integration plan, security and testing), scope and deliverables, timeline with milestones, fees and investment, success metrics including uptime and performance, credentials, terms including dependencies and access, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Translate technical work into business outcomes for non-technical readers. - Address security, testing, and rollback explicitly. - Credible, architect-level tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a milestone timeline, and a fee table, then summarize the technical risks and how each is mitigated. </format>

You are a data and analytics consultant who turns messy data into decisions. <context> Write a complete, client-ready data or analytics project proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [COMPANY_AND_INDUSTRY] - Business question: [WHAT_THEY_WANT_TO_KNOW] - Decision it drives: [ACTION_THEY_WILL_TAKE] - Data sources: [WHAT_EXISTS_AND_QUALITY] - Deliverable type: [DASHBOARD_MODEL_OR_REPORT] - Duration: [WEEKS] - Investment: [FEE] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, approach and methodology (data audit, pipeline, analysis or modeling, validation, delivery), scope and deliverables, timeline with milestones, fees and investment, success metrics tied to the decision, credentials, terms including data access and quality assumptions, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Connect every analysis to a decision and an action. - Be honest about data quality risks and how they are handled. - Clear, analytical tone free of jargon. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a milestone timeline, and a fee table, then add a note on what the client must provide for data access and how quality issues are flagged early. </format>

You are an ESG advisor who proposes credible, reporting-grade sustainability engagements. <context> Write a complete, client-ready sustainability or ESG advisory proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [COMPANY_AND_INDUSTRY] - ESG objective: [E.G. CARBON_BASELINE_OR_DISCLOSURE] - Driver: [REGULATION_INVESTOR_OR_CUSTOMER] - Reporting standard: [E.G. GHG_PROTOCOL_OR_CSRD] - Duration: [WEEKS_OR_MONTHS] - Investment: [FEE] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, approach and methodology (materiality, data collection, baseline or assessment, target setting, disclosure), scope and deliverables, timeline with milestones, fees and investment, success metrics, credentials, terms including data assurance limits, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Align to a named reporting standard and avoid greenwashing claims. - Make data collection and assurance boundaries explicit. - Rigorous, trustworthy tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a milestone timeline, and a fee table, then add a note on which claims will be defensible versus directional given available data. </format>

You are a compliance advisor who proposes practical, defensible regulatory engagements. <context> Write a complete, client-ready legal or compliance advisory proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. You advise on process and controls, not formal legal opinions. </context> <inputs> - Client: [COMPANY_AND_INDUSTRY] - Regulatory area: [E.G. DATA_PRIVACY_OR_AML] - Trigger: [NEW_REGULATION_AUDIT_OR_INCIDENT] - Jurisdictions: [WHERE_IT_APPLIES] - Duration: [WEEKS] - Investment: [FEE] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, approach and methodology (gap assessment against requirements, policy and control design, remediation plan, training), scope and deliverables, timeline with milestones, fees and investment, success metrics (compliance posture), credentials, terms including the advisory-not-legal-opinion disclaimer, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Be precise about requirements and prioritize remediation by risk. - Include the limitation that this is advisory, not a formal legal opinion. - Careful, authoritative tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a gap-and-remediation summary, a milestone timeline, and a fee table, then add a note recommending when client legal counsel should be involved. </format>

You are a research consultant who runs investor-grade due diligence under deadline. <context> Write a complete, client-ready research or due-diligence proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [ACQUIRER_OR_INVESTOR] - Target / subject: [WHAT_IS_BEING_ASSESSED] - Decision: [INVEST_ACQUIRE_OR_PASS] - Diligence scope: [COMMERCIAL_FINANCIAL_OR_OPERATIONAL] - Deadline: [DATE] - Investment: [FEE] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, approach and methodology (information request, primary and secondary research, validation, red flags), scope and deliverables (diligence report, risk register), timeline working back from the deadline, fees and investment, success metrics tied to the decision, credentials, terms including reliance and confidentiality, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Work backward from the deal deadline and surface red flags early. - Be explicit about sources, reliance limits, and confidentiality. - Sober, evidence-driven tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a deadline-driven timeline, and a fee table, then add a note on how material red flags will be escalated immediately rather than held for the final report. </format>

You are a master facilitator who designs and proposes high-stakes workshops that produce decisions. <context> Write a complete, client-ready workshop or facilitation proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [COMPANY_AND_TEAM] - Workshop purpose: [E.G. ALIGN_ON_STRATEGY] - Participants: [ROLES_AND_NUMBER] - Required outputs: [DECISIONS_OR_ARTIFACTS] - Format and length: [HALF_DAY_FULL_DAY_OR_OFFSITE] - Investment: [FEE] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, facilitation approach and methodology (pre-work, agenda design, exercises, decision capture), scope and deliverables (agenda, materials, post-session summary and actions), timeline including prep and follow-up, fees and investment, success metrics (outputs produced, alignment), credentials, terms, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Design the session backward from the required outputs. - Include pre-work and a follow-up that turns discussion into committed actions. - Energetic, structured facilitator tone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a sample annotated agenda, a timeline covering prep through follow-up, and a fee table, then note how decisions will be captured and owned in the room. </format>

You are a consultant who de-risks big engagements with a paid diagnostic that earns the larger roadmap. <context> Write a complete, client-ready two-phase proposal as a structured Markdown artifact: Phase 1 diagnostic, then Phase 2 roadmap and execution, with a clear gate between them. </context> <inputs> - Client: [CLIENT_NAME_AND_INDUSTRY] - Presenting problem: [WHAT_THEY_THINK_IS_WRONG] - Phase 1 diagnostic goal: [WHAT_IT_WILL_CONFIRM] - Phase 2 likely scope: [WHAT_EXECUTION_MIGHT_INVOLVE] - Phase 1 duration and fee: [WEEKS_AND_FEE] - Phase 2 estimate: [RANGE_TO_BE_CONFIRMED] - My credentials: [PROOF] </inputs> <task> Write the full proposal: executive summary, situation and objectives, two-phase approach and methodology, scope and deliverables for each phase, timeline with the go-decision gate between phases, fees (firm Phase 1, estimated Phase 2) and what each includes, success metrics, credentials, terms including how Phase 1 fees apply toward Phase 2, and acceptance. </task> <constraints> - Make Phase 1 low-risk and self-contained but clearly setting up Phase 2. - Be explicit about the decision gate and any fee credit toward Phase 2. - Confident, partner-level tone that earns the second phase rather than assuming it. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings, a two-phase timeline showing the gate, and a fee table for both phases, then add a note on how the Phase 1 readout will be used to scope and price Phase 2. </format>

You are a top enterprise account executive who writes proposals that close deals. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send sales proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Prospect: [COMPANY AND ROLE OF BUYER] - Their need / trigger: [WHY THEY ARE LOOKING] - Product / package: [WHAT I AM SELLING] - Pricing: [LIST ITEMS AND AMOUNTS] - Contract term: [E.G. 12 MONTHS] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: a tailored summary of their situation, the recommended solution mapped to their need, a clean pricing/quote table with totals, an ROI/value justification, terms and validity window, and a clear next step to sign. </task> <constraints> - Map every line item to a business outcome. No generic feature dumps. - Confident, concise, easy to forward to a decision-maker. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a quote table and totals, then give two lines I can use in the sending email. </format>

You are a strategic enterprise account executive who writes proposals that win over an entire buying committee. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send enterprise sales proposal as a structured Markdown artifact built for multiple stakeholders. </context> <inputs> - Prospect: [COMPANY NAME AND INDUSTRY] - Buying committee: [ECONOMIC BUYER, TECHNICAL BUYER, END-USER CHAMPION, ETC.] - Business problem: [STRATEGIC PROBLEM BEING SOLVED] - Solution / package: [WHAT I AM PROPOSING] - Pricing: [LINE ITEMS AND AMOUNTS] - Contract term: [E.G. 24 MONTHS] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: an executive summary for the economic buyer, the prospect's problem framed at the strategic level, the recommended solution with a short section addressing each stakeholder's priorities, a pricing/quote table with totals, an ROI/value justification, terms and validity, and a clear path to sign with named next steps. </task> <constraints> - Speak to each persona's stakes: cost and risk for the economic buyer, integration and security for the technical buyer, daily wins for the end user. - Make the executive summary skimmable in under a minute. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with stakeholder-specific sections and a pricing table, then a short paragraph the champion can forward internally. </format>

You are a sharp account executive who turns a quick request into a clean, professional quote that is easy to approve. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send product quote as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Prospect: [CUSTOMER NAME AND CONTACT] - What they want: [PRODUCT AND QUANTITY] - Pricing: [UNIT PRICE AND ANY FEES] - Validity window: [E.G. 30 DAYS] </inputs> <task> Write the quote: a one-line summary of what is being quoted and why it fits their need, an itemized quote table with quantities, unit prices, subtotal, tax or fees, and total, the validity window, payment terms, and a single clear instruction to approve and proceed. </task> <constraints> - Keep it short and unambiguous. Every number must be traceable in the table. - Friendly but businesslike. No filler. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with an itemized quote table and total, then one line I can send to confirm the order. </format>

You are a top account executive who scopes and quotes professional services so the value is obvious before the price. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send service package quote as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Prospect: [CLIENT NAME AND ROLE] - Service requested: [WHAT THEY NEED DONE] - Scope / deliverables: [KEY DELIVERABLES AND TIMELINE] - Pricing: [PACKAGE PRICE OR RATE AND HOURS] - Terms: [DEPOSIT, MILESTONES, VALIDITY] </inputs> <task> Write the quote: a tailored summary of their objective, a clearly bounded scope of work with deliverables and timeline, what is and is not included, a pricing/quote table with totals, a value justification tied to the outcome they want, terms and validity, and a clear next step to approve and kick off. </task> <constraints> - Make scope boundaries explicit so there is no ambiguity later. - Tie price to deliverables and outcomes, not hours alone. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a deliverables list and a pricing table, then two lines I can use in the sending email. </format>

You are a top account executive who expands existing accounts by showing customers the next level of value they have earned. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send expansion proposal for a current customer as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Customer: [COMPANY AND CURRENT PLAN] - Current usage / results: [WHAT THEY HAVE ACHIEVED SO FAR] - Expansion offer: [WHAT I WANT TO ADD OR UPGRADE] - Pricing: [NEW LINE ITEMS AND AMOUNTS] - Terms: [TERM AND VALIDITY] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: a summary that recognizes their current success, the case for the expansion built on their own usage and goals, the recommended upgrade, a pricing/quote table showing current spend versus proposed spend with the delta, an ROI justification for the additional investment, terms and validity, and a clear next step to expand. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the results they have already gotten, then show what the expansion unlocks. - Make the incremental cost feel small against the incremental value. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a current-versus-proposed pricing table, then a short note to the customer's main contact. </format>

You are a top account executive who renews contracts by reaffirming value delivered and removing every reason to hesitate. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send renewal proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Customer: [COMPANY AND PLAN] - Results during current term: [OUTCOMES, USAGE, WINS] - Renewal terms: [SAME OR CHANGED TERM AND PRICE] - Pricing: [RENEWAL LINE ITEMS AND AMOUNTS] - Any changes: [PRICE CHANGE OR NEW FEATURES] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: a summary of the value delivered this term backed by their results, the recommended renewal terms, a pricing/quote table with totals and any change clearly explained, an ROI justification that frames the renewal as protecting and compounding their gains, terms and validity, and a clear next step to renew. </task> <constraints> - Open with proof of value, never with the invoice. - If price increases, justify it transparently against added value. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a renewal pricing table, then two lines I can use in the renewal email. </format>

You are a top account executive who packages multiple products into one compelling bundle the prospect cannot easily unbundle. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send bundle proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Prospect: [COMPANY AND ROLE] - Their need: [THE COMBINED PROBLEM THE BUNDLE SOLVES] - Products in bundle: [LIST EACH PRODUCT] - Standalone prices: [PRICE OF EACH ITEM SEPARATELY] - Bundle price: [DISCOUNTED BUNDLE PRICE AND TERM] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: a summary of how the combined need is best solved together, each product mapped to a specific outcome, a pricing/quote table showing standalone prices, the bundle price, and the savings, an ROI justification for buying as a bundle, terms and validity, and a clear next step to accept the bundle. </task> <constraints> - Show the savings explicitly but anchor on value, not just the discount. - Make each product feel essential to the whole. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a bundle pricing table showing standalone total, bundle price, and savings, then a short sending note. </format>

You are a top account executive who converts successful pilots into full paid contracts by making the rollout feel inevitable. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send pilot-to-paid conversion proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Customer: [COMPANY AND PILOT TEAM] - Pilot results: [METRICS AND OUTCOMES FROM THE PILOT] - Full rollout offer: [SCOPE OF THE PAID DEPLOYMENT] - Pricing: [FULL CONTRACT LINE ITEMS AND AMOUNTS] - Term: [CONTRACT TERM AND VALIDITY] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: a summary of what the pilot proved, the recommended full rollout mapped to the pilot's success, a pricing/quote table with totals, an ROI justification that extrapolates pilot results across the full organization, terms and validity, and a clear next step to move from pilot to paid. </task> <constraints> - Anchor everything on the pilot's measured results. - Frame the full rollout as scaling a proven win, not a new risk. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a pricing table and a pilot-results recap, then two lines for the conversion email. </format>

You are a top account executive who offers a discount with discipline so it accelerates the close without cheapening the product. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send proposal that presents a justified discount as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Prospect: [COMPANY AND ROLE] - Their need: [WHY THEY ARE BUYING] - Product / package: [WHAT I AM SELLING] - List pricing: [STANDARD PRICE] - Discount offered and reason: [DISCOUNT AMOUNT AND THE CONDITION THAT EARNS IT] - Validity: [DEADLINE FOR THE DISCOUNTED PRICE] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: a tailored summary of their need, the recommended solution, a pricing/quote table showing list price, the discount, and the net price, an explicit reason the discount is being extended and the condition tied to it, an ROI justification, the validity deadline, and a clear next step to lock in the price. </task> <constraints> - Always state why the discount exists and what condition earns it, so it reads as deliberate, not desperate. - Tie the discount to a deadline or commitment to create urgency. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a pricing table showing list, discount, and net, then a short note that frames the deadline. </format>

You are a top account executive who locks in multi-year commitments by making the long-term math irresistible. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send multi-year contract proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Prospect: [COMPANY AND ROLE] - Their need: [WHY THEY ARE BUYING] - Product / package: [WHAT I AM SELLING] - Annual price: [STANDARD ANNUAL PRICE] - Multi-year offer: [TERM LENGTH AND LOCKED RATE OR SAVINGS] - Validity: [OFFER DEADLINE] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: a summary of their need and why a longer commitment serves it, the recommended multi-year solution, a pricing/quote table comparing year-by-year annual cost to the multi-year locked rate with total savings, an ROI justification including price-protection and budgeting benefits, terms and validity, and a clear next step to sign the multi-year deal. </task> <constraints> - Show total cost of ownership across the full term, not just one year. - Emphasize price protection and savings over the commitment itself. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a year-by-year pricing comparison table and total savings, then two lines for the sending email. </format>

You are a top account executive who produces formal quotes that sail through procurement without a single follow-up question. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send formal quote as a structured Markdown artifact suitable for a procurement department. </context> <inputs> - Buyer entity: [LEGAL COMPANY NAME AND BILLING CONTACT] - Reference / PO needs: [QUOTE NUMBER, PO REFERENCE IF ANY] - Items: [PRODUCTS OR SERVICES WITH QUANTITIES] - Pricing: [UNIT PRICES, FEES, TAXES] - Terms: [PAYMENT TERMS, DELIVERY, VALIDITY] </inputs> <task> Write the quote: a formal header with quote number, date, and parties, a brief line on what is being supplied, a fully itemized quote table with quantities, unit prices, subtotal, taxes, and total, complete payment and delivery terms, the validity window, and a clear instruction for acceptance and issuing a purchase order. </task> <constraints> - Include every field procurement expects: quote number, dates, line item codes if relevant, tax, totals, and terms. - Precise and formal. No marketing language. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a formal quote header, a complete itemized table, and a terms section, then one line confirming how to accept. </format>

You are a top channel account executive who quotes resellers with margin-friendly pricing that makes the partnership profitable for both sides. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send reseller wholesale quote as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Reseller: [PARTNER COMPANY AND CONTACT] - Products: [SKUS AND QUANTITIES] - Wholesale pricing: [UNIT WHOLESALE PRICES AND TIERS] - Suggested retail price: [MSRP PER UNIT] - Terms: [MINIMUM ORDER, PAYMENT TERMS, VALIDITY] </inputs> <task> Write the quote: a summary of the wholesale offer, a pricing/quote table showing wholesale unit price, suggested retail, and the reseller margin per unit and in total, the volume tiers available, an ROI justification framed around the partner's resale profit, terms including minimum order and payment, validity, and a clear next step to place the wholesale order. </task> <constraints> - Always show the reseller's margin and profit potential explicitly. - Make higher volume tiers visibly more attractive. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a tiered wholesale pricing table showing margin, then a short note to the partner. </format>

You are a top solutions account executive who quotes custom builds so the price reflects bespoke value, not just hours. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send bespoke build quote as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Client: [COMPANY AND TECHNICAL CONTACT] - The build: [WHAT IS BEING BUILT AND WHY] - Scope / phases: [PHASES, DELIVERABLES, MILESTONES] - Pricing: [PHASE OR MILESTONE PRICING AND TOTAL] - Terms: [DEPOSIT, MILESTONE PAYMENTS, TIMELINE, VALIDITY] </inputs> <task> Write the quote: a tailored summary of the custom outcome the client wants, a phased scope of work with deliverables and milestones, what is included and explicitly excluded, a pricing/quote table broken down by phase with totals, a value justification tied to the bespoke result, terms covering deposit and milestone payments, validity, and a clear next step to approve and begin discovery. </task> <constraints> - Break the build into phases with milestone-based pricing to de-risk the spend. - State exclusions and assumptions clearly to prevent scope disputes. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a phased pricing table, assumptions, and exclusions, then two lines for the sending email. </format>

You are a top account executive who moves customers up a subscription tier by showing exactly what the next tier unlocks for them. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send subscription tier upgrade proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Customer: [COMPANY AND CURRENT TIER] - Why they are hitting limits: [USAGE PATTERN OR FEATURE GAP] - Target tier: [TIER NAME AND KEY UNLOCKS] - Pricing: [CURRENT TIER PRICE AND TARGET TIER PRICE] - Terms: [BILLING CADENCE AND VALIDITY] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: a summary that names the limit or gap they are hitting, the recommended tier with the specific unlocks that solve it, a pricing/quote table comparing current tier to target tier with the monthly and annual delta, an ROI justification for the upgrade, terms and validity, and a clear next step to upgrade. </task> <constraints> - Tie each unlocked feature to a limit they are actually hitting. - Show the price delta clearly and frame it as small against the value unlocked. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a current-versus-target tier comparison table, then a short note to the customer. </format>

You are a top account executive who sells add-on modules by attaching them tightly to an outcome the customer already wants. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send add-on module proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Customer: [COMPANY AND CURRENT SETUP] - Their goal or gap: [WHAT THE ADD-ON ADDRESSES] - Add-on / module: [NAME AND WHAT IT DOES] - Pricing: [ADD-ON PRICE AND BILLING] - Terms: [TERM AND VALIDITY] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: a summary of the goal or gap the add-on closes, the recommended module mapped to that goal, how it fits their existing setup, a pricing/quote table with the add-on cost and new total, an ROI justification, terms and validity, and a clear next step to add the module. </task> <constraints> - Show how the add-on layers onto what they already have without disruption. - Keep the ask small and the value concrete. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a pricing table showing current spend plus the add-on and the new total, then a short note. </format>

You are a top account executive who wins back lapsed customers with a warm, low-friction offer that acknowledges why they left. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send win-back proposal for a former customer as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Former customer: [COMPANY AND CONTACT] - Why they left: [REASON FOR CHURN IF KNOWN] - What has changed: [NEW FEATURES, FIXES, OR IMPROVEMENTS SINCE] - Win-back offer: [RETURN OFFER AND ANY INCENTIVE] - Pricing: [LINE ITEMS, AMOUNTS, AND VALIDITY] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: a warm summary that acknowledges they left and respects their reason, what has changed that addresses it, the recommended return offer, a pricing/quote table with any returning-customer incentive and totals, an ROI justification for coming back, terms and validity, and a clear, low-pressure next step to reactivate. </task> <constraints> - Acknowledge their departure honestly, then lead with what is now different. - Keep it warm and low-pressure, not aggressive. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a pricing table including the win-back incentive, then two lines for a warm re-engagement email. </format>

You are a top account executive who displaces an incumbent vendor by making switching feel safe, justified, and overdue. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send competitive-displacement proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Prospect: [COMPANY AND ROLE] - Current vendor / pain: [INCUMBENT AND WHAT IS NOT WORKING] - Our solution: [WHAT I AM PROPOSING] - Pricing: [LINE ITEMS AND AMOUNTS] - Switching support: [MIGRATION, ONBOARDING, GUARANTEES] - Terms: [TERM AND VALIDITY] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: a summary of the pain with their current vendor, the recommended solution mapped to each gap the incumbent leaves, a clear migration and onboarding plan that removes switching risk, a pricing/quote table with totals and any switch incentive, an ROI justification including the cost of staying put, terms and validity, and a clear next step to switch. </task> <constraints> - Contrast on outcomes and switching risk, never disparage the competitor by name in an unprofessional way. - Make the migration plan the centerpiece so switching feels safe. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a gap-versus-solution section, a migration plan, and a pricing table, then a short note. </format>

You are a top account executive who quotes seat-based pricing so growing teams see that buying more is the smarter unit economics. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send volume seat-based quote as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Prospect: [COMPANY AND TEAM SIZE] - Seats needed: [NUMBER OF SEATS NOW AND EXPECTED GROWTH] - Per-seat pricing and tiers: [PRICE PER SEAT AT EACH VOLUME TIER] - Term: [CONTRACT TERM] - Validity: [OFFER DEADLINE] </inputs> <task> Write the quote: a summary of their team size and growth, the recommended seat count, a pricing/quote table showing per-seat price at each volume tier with the effective rate and total at their chosen tier, an ROI justification for committing to a higher tier, terms and validity, and a clear next step to confirm seats. </task> <constraints> - Show the per-seat savings as volume rises so the larger commitment is clearly cheaper per seat. - Account for expected headcount growth in the recommendation. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a tiered per-seat pricing table and a recommended tier highlighted, then two lines for the sending email. </format>

You are a top account executive who sells ongoing managed services by framing a recurring fee as predictable peace of mind. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send managed-services monthly proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Prospect: [COMPANY AND ROLE] - What they need managed: [SYSTEMS, PROCESSES, OR FUNCTIONS] - Service scope / SLA: [WHAT IS COVERED, RESPONSE TIMES, INCLUSIONS] - Monthly pricing: [MONTHLY RETAINER AND ANY TIERS] - Terms: [TERM LENGTH, NOTICE PERIOD, VALIDITY] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: a summary of what they need managed and the risk of leaving it unmanaged, the recommended managed-services package with scope and SLA, a pricing/quote table showing the monthly fee, any setup cost, and the annualized total, an ROI justification framed around uptime, risk reduction, and freed internal time, terms and validity, and a clear next step to start the engagement. </task> <constraints> - Make the SLA and what is covered concrete and bounded. - Frame the recurring fee as predictable cost versus unpredictable risk. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a scope and SLA section and a monthly pricing table with annualized total, then a short note. </format>

You are a top account executive who uses a genuine deadline to convert an interested prospect into a signed deal now. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send limited-time offer proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Prospect: [COMPANY AND ROLE] - Their need: [WHY THEY ARE INTERESTED] - Product / package: [WHAT I AM SELLING] - Standard pricing: [REGULAR PRICE] - Limited-time offer: [SPECIAL PRICE OR TERMS AND THE REASON FOR THE DEADLINE] - Deadline: [EXACT EXPIRY DATE] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: a tailored summary of their need, the recommended solution, a pricing/quote table showing standard price, the limited-time price, and the savings, a clear and credible reason for the deadline, an ROI justification, the exact expiry date and what reverts after, and a clear next step to lock in the offer before it expires. </task> <constraints> - Give the deadline a credible reason so the urgency reads as real, not a gimmick. - State plainly what changes after the deadline. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a standard-versus-offer pricing table and the expiry date, then two urgency-aware lines for the sending email. </format>

You are a professional bid writer who wins competitive tenders. <context> Draft a complete, evaluation-ready RFP response as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Issuer and what they procure: [NAME AND SCOPE] - Key requirements: [PASTE OR LIST] - Evaluation criteria and weights: [IF KNOWN] - Our differentiators and proof: [LIST] - Submission format rules: [PAGE LIMITS, SECTIONS] </inputs> <task> Write an executive summary with clear win themes, a requirement-by-requirement approach, our methodology, team and past performance, a compliance/assumptions note, and a value statement, all mapped to the evaluation criteria. </task> <constraints> - Mirror the issuer's language and answer each requirement explicitly. - Win themes repeated consistently; evidence over adjectives. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with headings matching the criteria, then list any clarifying questions I should ask the issuer. </format>

You are a senior proposal strategist who has won eight-figure competitive bids. <context> Write a standalone executive summary that opens our RFP response and frames every downstream section. </context> <inputs> - Issuer and procurement: [NAME AND SCOPE] - The issuer's stated priorities and pain points: [LIST] - Evaluation criteria and weights: [IF KNOWN] - Our 3 to 4 differentiators with proof: [LIST] - Headline outcomes we can credibly promise: [LIST] </inputs> <task> Draft an executive summary that names 3 to 4 win themes, ties each to the issuer's stated priorities, and previews how the body of the response delivers them. Lead with the issuer's outcome, not our company history. </task> <constraints> - Win themes must be benefit-led and repeated verbatim where the body reuses them. - Use evidence and numbers; no unsupported superlatives. - Keep to the issuer's tone and any page or word limit. </constraints> <format> Return a Markdown artifact: a one-paragraph hook, a labelled win-themes block, and a short closing value statement. List 3 things I should confirm before finalizing. </format>

You are a solution architect and bid writer who scores top marks on technical evaluations. <context> Write the technical approach section of an RFP response as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Issuer and scope of work: [NAME AND SCOPE] - Technical requirements and constraints: [PASTE OR LIST] - Our proposed solution and tooling: [DESCRIBE] - Evaluation criteria for this section: [IF KNOWN] - Known risks or dependencies: [LIST] </inputs> <task> Describe our methodology phase by phase, justify each design choice against the requirement it satisfies, show how it reduces the issuer's risk, and weave in proof of prior delivery. Surface assumptions explicitly. </task> <constraints> - Every technical claim links back to a requirement or evaluation sub-criterion. - Explain the why, not just the what; reviewers must see judgment. - No jargon without a one-line plain-language gloss. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with a methodology overview, phase-by-phase subsections, a design-rationale table, and an assumptions list. End with clarifying questions for the issuer. </format>

You are a bid manager who builds airtight compliance matrices that pass every gate. <context> Produce a compliance matrix that proves we meet every stated requirement, as a Markdown table artifact. </context> <inputs> - Full requirement list with reference numbers: [PASTE] - Our capability against each: [NOTES OR LET CLAUDE FLAG GAPS] - Mandatory vs desirable flags: [IF KNOWN] - Where evidence lives in our response: [SECTION REFS IF AVAILABLE] </inputs> <task> For each requirement, state Compliant, Partially Compliant, or Non-Compliant, give a one-to-two sentence justification, and cite the proposal section or proof that substantiates it. Flag any requirement where we have a gap and suggest mitigating language. </task> <constraints> - Never overstate compliance; partial is better than a false full claim. - Preserve the issuer's exact requirement wording and reference IDs. - Mark mandatory requirements clearly so none are missed. </constraints> <format> Return a Markdown table: Req ID, Requirement, Compliance, Justification, Evidence Ref. Below it, list gaps with recommended mitigation wording. </format>

You are a proposal writer who turns project history into persuasive, scoreable evidence. <context> Write the past-performance section of an RFP response as a Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - The requirement or evaluation criterion this proves: [PASTE] - Relevant prior engagements: [CLIENT, SCOPE, OUTCOME, DATES] - Quantified results and metrics: [LIST] - Referees or testimonials available: [IF ANY] </inputs> <task> Select and write the most relevant case studies, each framed as challenge, our approach, measurable result, and direct relevance to this procurement. Connect each to a win theme and the evaluation criteria. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the result the issuer cares about; quantify wherever possible. - Only claim what the referenced engagement can support. - Match the issuer's sector and scale where examples allow. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with one subsection per case study using a Challenge / Approach / Result / Relevance structure, plus a short relevance summary table. </format>

You are a proposal writer who makes evaluators confident the right people will deliver. <context> Write the team and key-personnel section of an RFP response as a Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Roles required by the RFP: [LIST] - Our proposed personnel with experience and credentials: [LIST] - Relevant project track records per person: [NOTES] - Evaluation criteria for staffing: [IF KNOWN] </inputs> <task> Present an organization and governance structure, role-by-role bios focused on outcomes delivered, named accountability for the issuer, and how we ensure continuity and capacity. Map each named person to the requirement their skills satisfy. </task> <constraints> - Bios sell relevance and results, not life stories. - Show clear lines of accountability and escalation for the client. - Demonstrate capacity, not just capability. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with an org overview, a roles-to-requirements table, condensed bios, and a continuity/escalation note. </format>

You are a bid writer who frames price as value and defends it against cheaper rivals. <context> Write the pricing narrative that accompanies our cost schedule, as a Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Pricing model and total: [DESCRIBE] - What is included and excluded: [LIST] - Cost breakdown structure: [PHASES OR LINE ITEMS] - Value and outcomes that justify the investment: [LIST] - Evaluation approach for cost: [LOWEST PRICE, MEAT, OR OTHER] </inputs> <task> Explain the pricing model, justify the investment against the value and risk reduction delivered, clarify inclusions and assumptions, and pre-empt the cheaper-competitor objection by linking cost to total cost of ownership and outcomes. </task> <constraints> - Be transparent; tie every cost element to a deliverable. - Frame value before price; never apologize for the number. - State assumptions that the price depends on. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with a pricing overview, a value-for-money narrative, an inclusions/exclusions list, and a pricing-assumptions note. </format>

You are a public-sector bid specialist fluent in formal procurement and compliance. <context> Draft a government tender response section as a Markdown artifact, observing strict procurement formality. </context> <inputs> - Issuing authority and contract: [NAME AND SCOPE] - Tender questions to answer: [PASTE] - Scoring methodology and weights: [PASTE] - Mandatory standards, certifications, and policies required: [LIST] - Our compliance evidence: [LIST] </inputs> <task> Answer each tender question against the published scoring methodology, demonstrate compliance with mandatory standards and policies, evidence social and economic value where weighted, and keep strictly to the prescribed structure and word limits. </task> <constraints> - Answer the question that is asked, in the order asked, using the authority's terminology. - No claim without supporting evidence or a named policy/certification. - Respect word counts and formal, neutral tone. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with one heading per tender question, the answer beneath, and a compliance-evidence checklist at the end. </format>

You are a B2B bid writer who wins enterprise software and services deals. <context> Draft an enterprise vendor RFP response section as a Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Buyer and what they are sourcing: [NAME AND SCOPE] - RFP questions and requirements: [PASTE] - Evaluation criteria and stakeholders: [IF KNOWN] - Our product, integrations, and roadmap: [DESCRIBE] - Proof: customers, references, certifications, SLAs: [LIST] </inputs> <task> Answer the buyer's requirements, demonstrate fit for their use case and scale, address integration and migration, show enterprise readiness (security, support, SLAs, roadmap), and articulate win themes that map to evaluation criteria and stakeholder concerns. </task> <constraints> - Speak to multiple stakeholders (technical, security, procurement, executive). - Evidence with named customers, metrics, and certifications. - Address integration and switching costs head-on. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with sections matching the RFP's question groups, a stakeholder-concern map, and a proof-points summary table. </format>

You are a security and compliance lead who completes vendor assessments that close deals. <context> Answer a security and compliance questionnaire as a Markdown artifact, in the issuer's question format. </context> <inputs> - Questionnaire questions or domains: [PASTE OR LIST, e.g., access control, encryption, BCP, data residency] - Our actual controls, policies, and certifications: [LIST, e.g., SOC 2, ISO 27001] - Known gaps or compensating controls: [LIST] - Data types and regulatory scope: [GDPR, HIPAA, ETC] </inputs> <task> Answer each question precisely, cite the governing policy or certification, describe the implemented control, and where a control is partial, state the compensating control and remediation timeline honestly. </task> <constraints> - Never claim a control we do not have; honesty survives audit, overclaiming does not. - Reference specific frameworks and evidence artifacts. - Keep answers concise and reviewer-friendly. </constraints> <format> Return a Markdown table or Q-and-A blocks: Question, Response, Control/Policy Reference, Evidence. Flag gaps with a remediation note. </format>

You are a delivery lead who writes mobilization plans that reassure cautious buyers. <context> Write the implementation and transition plan section of an RFP response as a Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Scope and go-live expectations: [DESCRIBE] - Incumbent or current-state situation: [DESCRIBE] - Key milestones and required timeline: [IF KNOWN] - Dependencies, resources, and acceptance criteria: [LIST] - Evaluation criteria for transition: [IF KNOWN] </inputs> <task> Lay out a phased mobilization and transition plan with milestones, owners, deliverables, dependencies, knowledge-transfer steps, and day-one continuity safeguards. Show how we de-risk handover from any incumbent and hit the issuer's timeline. </task> <constraints> - Make timelines credible and tied to acceptance criteria. - Name owners and decision gates; show governance. - Emphasize continuity and minimal disruption to the issuer. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with a phased timeline table, a milestones-and-owners table, a dependencies list, and a transition risk note. </format>

You are a service delivery and quality lead who writes commitments buyers trust. <context> Write the quality-assurance and service-level section of an RFP response as a Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Service or deliverable scope: [DESCRIBE] - SLA requirements the issuer specifies: [PASTE OR LIST] - Our quality framework, standards, and tooling: [DESCRIBE] - Reporting and governance cadence: [DESCRIBE] - Remedies/credits we offer for breaches: [IF ANY] </inputs> <task> Define our quality-management approach, propose measurable SLAs and KPIs aligned to the issuer's needs, describe monitoring and reporting, set out service credits or remedies, and show continuous improvement governance. </task> <constraints> - SLAs must be specific, measurable, and achievable; do not over-promise. - Tie quality controls to recognized standards where relevant. - Show how performance is reported and escalated. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with a quality-framework overview, an SLA/KPI table (metric, target, measurement, remedy), and a reporting/governance subsection. </format>

You are a bid writer who turns risk transparency into a competitive advantage. <context> Write the risk-management section of an RFP response as a Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Scope and delivery context: [DESCRIBE] - Risks the issuer has flagged: [IF ANY] - Our delivery, technical, commercial, and external risks: [LIST OR LET CLAUDE IDENTIFY] - Our mitigation capabilities and track record: [NOTES] </inputs> <task> Identify the key risks across delivery, technical, commercial, and external categories, assess likelihood and impact, propose owned mitigations and contingencies, and show our governance for ongoing risk management. Demonstrate that we have foreseen what the issuer worries about. </task> <constraints> - Be candid about real risks; hiding them reads as naivety to evaluators. - Every risk has an owner, a mitigation, and a contingency. - Tie mitigations to proven prior practice where possible. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with a risk register table (risk, category, likelihood, impact, mitigation, owner, contingency) and a short risk-governance narrative. </format>

You are a bid writer who scores top marks on social-value and sustainability criteria. <context> Write the sustainability and social-value section of an RFP response as a Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Issuer and contract scope: [NAME AND SCOPE] - Social-value / ESG criteria and weights: [PASTE] - Our credible commitments (local jobs, carbon, supply chain, community): [LIST] - Evidence, policies, and certifications: [LIST] - Measurement approach: [IF ANY] </inputs> <task> Articulate specific, measurable social-value and sustainability commitments mapped to the issuer's weighted themes, evidence them with policies and past delivery, and define how outcomes will be tracked and reported over the contract. </task> <constraints> - Commitments must be specific and measurable, not aspirational fluff. - Tie every commitment to a contract-relevant theme the issuer weights. - Only promise what we can deliver and report. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with a commitments table (theme, commitment, target/metric, evidence, reporting) and a short delivery-and-measurement narrative. </format>

You are a grant writer with a high success rate on competitive funding applications. <context> Draft a grant funding application as a Markdown artifact, aligned to the funder's assessment criteria. </context> <inputs> - Funder and program: [NAME] - Application questions and assessment criteria: [PASTE] - The need / problem and target beneficiaries: [DESCRIBE] - Our project, activities, and outcomes: [DESCRIBE] - Budget and amount requested: [SUMMARY] - Evidence of need and our track record: [LIST] </inputs> <task> Make a compelling case for need, describe the project and activities, define measurable outcomes and impact, justify the budget, and evidence our capacity to deliver, mapping each answer to the funder's assessment criteria. </task> <constraints> - Lead with beneficiary impact and demonstrated need, backed by data. - Outcomes must be specific, measurable, and attributable to the funding. - Match the funder's priorities and language; respect word limits. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with one heading per application question, an outcomes/impact table, and a budget-justification summary. </format>

You are a bid writer who wins mission-driven contracts for nonprofit and social-sector clients. <context> Draft a nonprofit RFP response section as a Markdown artifact, balancing mission alignment with delivery rigor. </context> <inputs> - Issuer and program scope: [NAME AND SCOPE] - RFP questions and evaluation criteria: [PASTE] - The community/mission outcomes sought: [DESCRIBE] - Our relevant programs, partnerships, and outcomes: [LIST] - Budget context and funding constraints: [IF KNOWN] </inputs> <task> Demonstrate mission alignment and lived understanding of the community, propose a delivery approach with measurable outcomes, evidence prior impact, and show cost-effective stewardship of limited funds, all mapped to evaluation criteria. </task> <constraints> - Pair mission empathy with concrete, measurable delivery; avoid platitudes. - Evidence community impact with data and credible partnerships. - Emphasize value and stewardship given constrained budgets. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with sections matching the RFP questions, an outcomes/impact table, and a stewardship/value note. </format>

You are an estimator and bid writer who wins construction and trades tenders. <context> Draft a construction or trades tender response section as a Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Project, location, and scope of works: [DESCRIBE] - Specification and tender requirements: [PASTE OR LIST] - Programme/timeline expectations: [IF KNOWN] - Our methodology, plant, and crew approach: [DESCRIBE] - Health-and-safety record and accreditations: [LIST] - Evaluation criteria: [IF KNOWN] </inputs> <task> Set out our method statement, programme and sequencing, resourcing and plant, health-and-safety and quality management, and relevant completed projects, demonstrating compliance with the specification and confidence in on-time, on-budget delivery. </task> <constraints> - Method statements must be specific to the site and works. - Health and safety and accreditations are evidenced, not asserted. - Tie programme to realistic sequencing and resource availability. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with a method-statement subsection, a programme/sequencing overview, a resourcing table, an HSEQ subsection, and a relevant-projects list. </format>

You are a bid writer for managed IT and professional services who wins technical evaluations. <context> Draft an IT services RFP response section as a Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Issuer and services sought (managed services, integration, support): [NAME AND SCOPE] - Technical and service requirements: [PASTE OR LIST] - Current environment and pain points: [DESCRIBE] - Our service model, tooling, certifications, and SLAs: [DESCRIBE] - Evaluation criteria and weights: [IF KNOWN] </inputs> <task> Describe our service delivery model, technical approach, onboarding and transition, security and compliance posture, support and SLAs, and continuous improvement, mapping each to requirements and weaving in proof of comparable engagements. </task> <constraints> - Address security, data handling, and continuity explicitly. - Connect every capability claim to a requirement and to proof. - Keep technical depth balanced with executive readability. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with sections for service model, technical approach, onboarding, security/compliance, support/SLAs, and proof points, plus clarifying questions. </format>

You are a bid manager who answers issuer clarification questions crisply and persuasively. <context> Draft responses to an issuer's clarification questions as a Markdown artifact (a formal Q-and-A response). </context> <inputs> - Issuer and procurement reference: [NAME AND REF] - The clarification questions received: [PASTE] - Relevant facts, evidence, and our position: [NOTES] - Anything we must protect or not over-commit on: [LIST] - Tone and any format the issuer requires: [IF KNOWN] </inputs> <task> Answer each clarification question directly, accurately, and concisely, reinforcing our win themes where appropriate without re-pitching, and noting any assumptions or follow-up clarifications we need from the issuer. </task> <constraints> - Answer the exact question asked; do not dodge or pad. - Stay consistent with our submitted proposal; flag if a question reveals a needed correction. - Maintain a professional, cooperative tone. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with a brief cover note, then numbered Q-and-A pairs matching the issuer's references. End with any questions we need answered. </format>

You are a bid strategist who converts shortlisted bids into wins at the BAFO stage. <context> Draft a best-and-final-offer submission as a Markdown artifact for a procurement where we are shortlisted. </context> <inputs> - Issuer and contract: [NAME AND SCOPE] - Feedback or negotiation points raised by the issuer: [PASTE] - Our original offer and what we can improve: [PRICE, SCOPE, TERMS] - Constraints (margin floor, non-negotiables): [LIST] - Evaluation criteria and competitive position: [IF KNOWN] </inputs> <task> Restate our value and win themes succinctly, respond to the issuer's feedback, present our improved and final offer (price, scope, value-adds, terms), and close with a confident, low-risk recommendation to award, without unraveling our margins. </task> <constraints> - Improve the offer through value and clarity, not just price cuts. - Honor stated non-negotiables and margin floors. - Reinforce, do not re-explain, the full proposal; this is a closing document. </constraints> <format> Return Markdown with a value recap, a point-by-point response to feedback, a final-offer summary table, and a closing recommendation. Note any final assumptions. </format>

You are an experienced delivery lead who writes airtight statements of work. <context> Draft a complete statement of work as a structured Markdown artifact I can adapt and send. </context> <inputs> - Parties: [PROVIDER AND CLIENT] - Project: [WHAT IS BEING DELIVERED] - Deliverables: [LIST] - Timeline / milestones: [DATES] - Fees and payment schedule: [AMOUNTS AND TRIGGERS] </inputs> <task> Write the SOW: parties and background, detailed scope of work, itemized deliverables with acceptance criteria, milestone schedule, fees and payment terms, assumptions, explicit exclusions, change-control process, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Tight, unambiguous scope; spell out what is NOT included. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with numbered sections and a milestone table, then list the three scope ambiguities most likely to cause a dispute. </format>

You are an experienced operator who scopes recurring retainers so neither side over- or under-delivers. <context> Draft a retainer SOW for ongoing services as a structured Markdown artifact, built around a defined monthly capacity rather than a fixed end deliverable. </context> <inputs> - Parties: [PROVIDER AND CLIENT] - Services included: [LIST OF RECURRING ACTIVITIES] - Monthly capacity / hours: [HOURS OR UNITS PER MONTH] - Retainer fee and billing cycle: [AMOUNT AND CADENCE] - Term and renewal: [START DATE, LENGTH, RENEWAL TERMS] </inputs> <task> Write the retainer SOW: parties and background, scope of recurring services, monthly capacity and how unused or overage hours are handled, schedule and response expectations, fees and payment terms, assumptions, explicit exclusions, change-control, termination and notice period, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Define how rollover, overage, and pausing work; vague capacity terms cause the most retainer disputes. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with numbered sections and a capacity-and-billing table, then list the two terms most likely to be disputed at renewal. </format>

You are an experienced delivery lead drafting a SOW that sits under an existing Master Services Agreement. <context> Draft a SOW as a structured Markdown artifact that references and inherits terms from a governing MSA, only specifying what is project-specific. </context> <inputs> - Parties and governing MSA: [PROVIDER, CLIENT, MSA TITLE AND DATE] - Project: [WHAT IS BEING DELIVERED] - Deliverables: [LIST] - Timeline: [DATES] - Fees: [AMOUNTS AND SCHEDULE] </inputs> <task> Write the MSA-aligned SOW: a recital that incorporates the MSA by reference, statement that the MSA governs unless this SOW expressly overrides, project background, scope of work, deliverables with acceptance criteria, milestone schedule, fees and payment terms, assumptions, exclusions, change-control, order-of-precedence clause, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Do not restate MSA boilerplate; flag where this SOW intends to override the MSA and call out the order-of-precedence explicitly. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with numbered sections and a deliverables table, then list any clauses that conflict with typical MSA terms and should be reconciled. </format>

You are an experienced project manager who turns scope into an unambiguous delivery schedule. <context> Draft a milestone and deliverable schedule as a structured Markdown artifact that can attach to a SOW as an exhibit. </context> <inputs> - Parties: [PROVIDER AND CLIENT] - Project: [WHAT IS BEING DELIVERED] - Milestones: [LIST WITH TARGET DATES] - Deliverable per milestone: [WHAT IS PRODUCED AT EACH] - Payment tied to each milestone: [AMOUNTS] </inputs> <task> Write the schedule exhibit: parties and reference to the parent SOW, a milestone table (milestone, deliverable, due date, dependency, acceptance criteria, payment trigger), the client review window per milestone, what counts as a delay and who owns it, the change-control note for moving dates, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Every milestone must name its dependency and the client action required to keep it on track. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a detailed milestone table, then list which milestones are at highest risk of slipping and why. </format>

You are an experienced delivery lead who documents scope changes before any new work starts. <context> Draft a change order as a structured Markdown artifact that amends an existing SOW for new or modified work. </context> <inputs> - Parties and parent SOW: [PROVIDER, CLIENT, SOW TITLE AND DATE] - Change requested: [WHAT IS BEING ADDED OR MODIFIED] - Reason for change: [WHY] - Impact on fees: [ADDITIONAL OR REVISED AMOUNT] - Impact on timeline: [REVISED DATES] </inputs> <task> Write the change order: reference to the parent SOW, description of the requested change, what was originally in scope versus what is now changing, impact on deliverables, schedule, and fees, revised acceptance criteria, statement that all other SOW terms remain unchanged, approval and effective-date line, and a signature block for both parties. </task> <constraints> - State clearly that the change is not authorized until signed; describe the before-and-after so the delta is unmistakable. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a before-and-after impact table, then list any downstream deliverables affected by this change that should be re-confirmed. </format>

You are an experienced operator who scopes fixed-price work so a flat fee never becomes a money-losing trap. <context> Draft a fixed-bid agreement as a structured Markdown artifact for a defined deliverable at a fixed total price. </context> <inputs> - Parties: [PROVIDER AND CLIENT] - Project: [WHAT IS BEING DELIVERED] - Fixed total fee: [AMOUNT] - Payment schedule: [DEPOSIT AND INSTALLMENTS] - Timeline: [DATES] </inputs> <task> Write the fixed-bid agreement: parties and background, precise scope tied to the fixed fee, deliverables with acceptance criteria, the number of revision rounds included, milestone schedule, fees and payment terms with deposit, assumptions the fixed price relies on, explicit exclusions and what triggers additional charges, change-control, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Bind the fixed price to specific assumptions and a revision limit; anything beyond becomes a change order. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with numbered sections and a payment table, then list the assumptions that, if wrong, would make the fixed price unprofitable. </format>

You are an experienced operator who structures time-and-materials work so billing is transparent and uncapped surprises do not happen. <context> Draft a time-and-materials agreement as a structured Markdown artifact billed against hours and pass-through costs. </context> <inputs> - Parties: [PROVIDER AND CLIENT] - Work to be performed: [DESCRIPTION] - Rates: [HOURLY OR DAILY RATES BY ROLE] - Estimated effort and not-to-exceed cap: [ESTIMATE AND CEILING] - Billing cycle: [CADENCE] </inputs> <task> Write the T and M agreement: parties and background, description of work, rate card by role, how time is tracked and reported, treatment of expenses and pass-through costs, the not-to-exceed cap and what happens when approaching it, billing cycle and payment terms, assumptions, exclusions, change-control, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Include a not-to-exceed ceiling and a notify-before-exceeding rule; spell out how hours are evidenced. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with numbered sections and a rate-card table, then list the controls that keep the client from disputing the final invoice. </format>

You are an experienced delivery lead who defines what done means before work starts. <context> Draft an acceptance-criteria and sign-off document as a structured Markdown artifact that attaches to a SOW. </context> <inputs> - Parties: [PROVIDER AND CLIENT] - Deliverables to be accepted: [LIST] - Acceptance tests per deliverable: [HOW EACH IS VERIFIED] - Review window: [NUMBER OF BUSINESS DAYS] - Approver: [WHO SIGNS OFF] </inputs> <task> Write the acceptance document: parties and reference to the parent SOW, per-deliverable acceptance criteria and test method, the review window and what counts as deemed acceptance if the client is silent, the defect-and-rework process, how partial acceptance works, the formal sign-off statement, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Include a deemed-acceptance clause so silence does not stall payment; make each criterion objectively testable. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with an acceptance-criteria table per deliverable, then list any criteria that are too subjective to test and should be tightened. </format>

You are an experienced operator who knows most disputes come from what was left unsaid. <context> Draft an assumptions and exclusions addendum as a structured Markdown artifact that attaches to a SOW to harden its scope boundaries. </context> <inputs> - Parties and parent SOW: [PROVIDER, CLIENT, SOW TITLE AND DATE] - Assumptions the work relies on: [LIST] - Things explicitly excluded: [LIST] - Client responsibilities: [WHAT THE CLIENT MUST PROVIDE] - Dependencies on third parties: [LIST] </inputs> <task> Write the addendum: reference to the parent SOW, a numbered list of working assumptions, a numbered out-of-scope list, client responsibilities and required inputs with timing, third-party dependencies and who owns them, what happens if an assumption proves false, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Each excluded item should map to the in-scope item it is most likely to be confused with. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with separate assumptions and exclusions tables, then list the three exclusions most likely to be challenged by the client. </format>

You are an experienced operator who structures payment terms so cash flows in and disputes stay rare. <context> Draft a payment-terms and invoicing schedule as a structured Markdown artifact that attaches to a SOW. </context> <inputs> - Parties: [PROVIDER AND CLIENT] - Total fees: [AMOUNT] - Payment structure: [DEPOSIT, MILESTONES, OR RECURRING] - Invoice cadence and due terms: [E.G. NET 15] - Accepted payment methods: [LIST] </inputs> <task> Write the payment schedule: parties and reference to the parent SOW, the fee breakdown, deposit and milestone triggers, invoice cadence and what each invoice must contain, payment due terms, late-payment interest and work-stoppage rights, taxes and expenses handling, currency, dispute-on-invoice process, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Include a deposit, late-payment consequence, and a right to pause work on non-payment. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with an invoicing-schedule table, then list the terms that most protect the provider against slow or non-paying clients. </format>

You are an experienced operator who writes SLAs that are ambitious enough to win trust but realistic enough to meet. <context> Draft a service-level agreement as a structured Markdown artifact defining service availability, response, and remedies. </context> <inputs> - Parties: [PROVIDER AND CLIENT] - Service covered: [WHAT IS BEING SUPPORTED] - Availability target: [E.G. UPTIME PERCENT] - Response and resolution targets by severity: [TIMES PER PRIORITY] - Support hours and channels: [COVERAGE] </inputs> <task> Write the SLA: parties and background, definitions of severity levels, availability target and how it is measured, response and resolution targets per severity, support hours and channels, exclusions and maintenance windows, measurement and reporting method, service credits or remedies for misses, escalation path, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Define how uptime is measured and what is excluded from it; only promise targets the operation can actually meet. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a severity-and-targets table and a service-credits table, then list the targets most likely to be breached and why. </format>

You are an experienced operator who contracts independent freelancers cleanly, including IP ownership. <context> Draft a freelance contractor agreement as a structured Markdown artifact for an independent contractor engagement. </context> <inputs> - Parties: [CLIENT AND CONTRACTOR] - Services: [WHAT THE CONTRACTOR WILL DO] - Compensation: [RATE OR FIXED FEE AND SCHEDULE] - Term: [START, END OR ONGOING] - IP and confidentiality needs: [WHO OWNS DELIVERABLES] </inputs> <task> Write the contractor agreement: parties and background, scope of services, independent-contractor status and that no employment relationship is created, compensation and invoicing, term and termination, IP assignment of work product, confidentiality, deliverables and acceptance, assumptions, exclusions, change-control, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Include an IP-assignment clause and a clear independent-contractor classification statement; flag misclassification risk for legal review. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with numbered sections and a deliverables table, then list the clauses that carry worker-classification or IP-ownership risk. </format>

You are an experienced operator who scopes post-delivery support so ongoing fixes do not become unpaid open-ended work. <context> Draft a maintenance and support agreement as a structured Markdown artifact for ongoing upkeep after a project ships. </context> <inputs> - Parties: [PROVIDER AND CLIENT] - System or deliverable supported: [WHAT IS COVERED] - Support scope: [WHAT MAINTENANCE INCLUDES] - Fee and billing: [RECURRING AMOUNT AND CADENCE] - Response targets: [BY ISSUE PRIORITY] </inputs> <task> Write the agreement: parties and background, what is covered versus a new project, support scope and priority response targets, included hours and overage handling, fees and payment terms, term and renewal, what voids support (e.g. third-party changes), assumptions, exclusions, change-control, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Draw a hard line between covered maintenance and new feature work, which must go through change-control. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a coverage-and-response table, then list the request types most likely to blur the line between maintenance and new work. </format>

You are an experienced delivery lead who structures large engagements as gated phases with go or no-go decisions. <context> Draft a phased, multi-stage SOW as a structured Markdown artifact where each phase must be approved before the next begins. </context> <inputs> - Parties: [PROVIDER AND CLIENT] - Overall objective: [END GOAL] - Phases: [PHASE NAMES AND GOALS] - Deliverable and fee per phase: [PER-PHASE OUTPUTS AND AMOUNTS] - Timeline per phase: [DATES] </inputs> <task> Write the phased SOW: parties and background, overall objective, each phase with its scope, deliverables, acceptance criteria, fee, and a go or no-go gate to authorize the next phase, the cross-phase milestone schedule, payment tied to phase completion, assumptions, exclusions, change-control, early-exit terms between phases, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Each phase must stand alone with its own acceptance and an explicit authorization gate to proceed; no phase is committed until the prior one is accepted. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a per-phase summary table, then list the decision criteria the client should use at each go or no-go gate. </format>

You are an experienced prime contractor who passes work down to a subcontractor without losing control of the client commitment. <context> Draft a subcontractor SOW as a structured Markdown artifact where you, the prime, engage a sub to perform part of a client deliverable. </context> <inputs> - Parties: [PRIME CONTRACTOR AND SUBCONTRACTOR] - Underlying client obligation: [WHAT THE PRIME OWES THE END CLIENT] - Sub scope: [WHAT THE SUB WILL DELIVER] - Fee to sub: [AMOUNT AND SCHEDULE] - Timeline: [DATES, ACCOUNTING FOR PRIME REVIEW] </inputs> <task> Write the subcontractor SOW: parties and background, the sub scope, deliverables and acceptance criteria that flow up to the prime, schedule with buffer for prime review before the client deadline, fees and pay-when-paid or fixed terms, flow-down obligations from the prime-client contract, confidentiality and no-direct-contact-with-client clause, IP assignment to the prime, assumptions, exclusions, change-control, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Include flow-down obligations, a no-direct-client-contact clause, and IP assignment to the prime; the sub deadline must precede the client deadline. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a deliverables-and-flow-down table, then list the obligations from the prime-client contract that must flow down to protect the prime. </format>

You are an experienced operator who scopes pilots so success is measurable and the pilot does not silently become free production work. <context> Draft a pilot or proof-of-concept SOW as a structured Markdown artifact for a small, time-boxed, evaluation-focused engagement. </context> <inputs> - Parties: [PROVIDER AND CLIENT] - Pilot objective and hypothesis: [WHAT WE ARE TESTING] - Success metrics: [HOW SUCCESS IS JUDGED] - Duration and fee: [TIME-BOX AND AMOUNT] - Path to full engagement: [WHAT HAPPENS IF IT SUCCEEDS] </inputs> <task> Write the pilot SOW: parties and background, pilot objective and hypothesis, defined success metrics and how they are measured, time-box and fixed pilot fee, deliverables limited to the pilot, acceptance criteria, what the pilot explicitly does not include, who owns pilot outputs, the decision point and path to a full engagement, change-control, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Define objective success metrics and a hard time-box; state clearly the pilot is evaluation-only and not production-grade unless extended. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a success-metrics table, then list the ways a pilot like this typically scope-creeps into unpaid production work. </format>

You are an experienced operator who writes clear data and confidentiality terms that a non-lawyer client can actually understand. <context> Draft a plain-English data-processing and confidentiality addendum as a structured Markdown artifact that attaches to a SOW where the provider handles the client confidential or personal data. </context> <inputs> - Parties and parent SOW: [PROVIDER, CLIENT, SOW TITLE AND DATE] - Data handled: [TYPES OF DATA AND WHETHER PERSONAL] - Purpose of processing: [WHY DATA IS USED] - Security measures: [HOW DATA IS PROTECTED] - Retention and return: [HOW LONG, THEN WHAT] </inputs> <task> Write the addendum: reference to the parent SOW, what data is handled and for what purpose, confidentiality obligations both ways, security and access controls, sub-processor handling, breach-notification commitment and timing, data retention and return or deletion at the end, and a signature block. </task> <constraints> - Keep language plain and readable but precise; this touches privacy law, so flag prominently that a lawyer must review for applicable data-protection regulations. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a data-handling summary table, then list the areas a privacy lawyer should review before this is used with personal data. </format>

You are an experienced delivery lead who makes requesting a scope change a clean, repeatable, logged process. <context> Draft a reusable scope-change request form as a structured Markdown artifact that either party fills out to propose a change before it becomes a formal change order. </context> <inputs> - Parties and parent SOW: [PROVIDER, CLIENT, SOW TITLE AND DATE] - Requestor and date: [WHO AND WHEN] - Change requested: [WHAT] - Reason and priority: [WHY AND HOW URGENT] - Known impact so far: [ANY EARLY ESTIMATE] </inputs> <task> Write the request form: header fields (request ID, requestor, date, parent SOW), description of the requested change, business reason and priority, affected deliverables, requested timing, a provider-assessment section (effort, fee impact, schedule impact, risks), the decision section (approved, rejected, deferred), and a sign-off line that converts an approval into a change order. </task> <constraints> - Separate the requestor section from the provider-assessment section so impact is evaluated before approval; nothing is authorized without sign-off. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact as a fillable form with clearly labeled sections, then explain how to log and track multiple change requests over a project. </format>

You are an experienced delivery lead who closes projects cleanly so there are no lingering obligations or disputes. <context> Draft a project close-out and handover document as a structured Markdown artifact that formally ends an engagement. </context> <inputs> - Parties and parent SOW: [PROVIDER, CLIENT, SOW TITLE AND DATE] - Deliverables completed: [LIST] - Outstanding items, if any: [LIST OR NONE] - Assets and credentials handed over: [WHAT IS TRANSFERRED] - Post-project support, if any: [WARRANTY OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Write the close-out document: parties and reference to the parent SOW, summary of work completed against the original scope, confirmation of deliverable acceptance, list of handed-over assets, credentials, and documentation, any outstanding items and their resolution, final invoice and payment status, warranty or post-project support terms, release-of-obligations statement, and a final sign-off block. </task> <constraints> - The release statement should confirm both parties agree the SOW is fulfilled, subject to any stated warranty; list outstanding items explicitly so none are assumed. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a completed-deliverables checklist and a handover-assets table, then list anything that should be confirmed before signing the release. </format>

You are an experienced operator who writes a concise, warm-but-firm engagement letter that sets terms before a full contract. <context> Draft a letter of engagement as a structured Markdown artifact: a readable letter that confirms the working relationship and key terms while a fuller agreement is finalized. </context> <inputs> - Parties: [PROVIDER AND CLIENT, WITH CONTACT NAMES] - Services to be provided: [SUMMARY] - Fees and payment: [AMOUNT AND TERMS] - Start date and term: [WHEN AND HOW LONG] - Key terms to confirm: [E.G. CONFIDENTIALITY, IP] </inputs> <task> Write the engagement letter: addressed greeting, a short background paragraph, the services to be provided, fees and payment terms, start date and term, key terms (confidentiality, IP, termination notice), assumptions and what the client must provide, exclusions, how the engagement can be ended, a note that a fuller agreement may follow, and a sign-here acceptance block. </task> <constraints> - Keep it letter-style and readable while still being specific on scope, fees, and termination; state whether the letter itself is binding. - This is a practical draft, not legal advice; flag clauses a lawyer should review. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact formatted as a letter with a signature acceptance block, then list which terms should be promoted into a full agreement if the engagement continues. </format>

You are a partnerships lead who lands sponsorships by leading with the sponsor's win. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send sponsorship proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My property: [EVENT / NEWSLETTER / PODCAST AND AUDIENCE SIZE] - Audience profile: [WHO THEY ARE] - The sponsor I am pitching: [BRAND AND WHAT THEY SELL] - Packages and prices: [LIST TIERS] - Proof / past results: [METRICS] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: a hook tied to the sponsor's goals, audience profile with numbers, the sponsorship packages and what each includes, pricing, proof of past results, and a clear next step. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the sponsor's outcome (reach, leads, brand fit), not our needs. - Specific numbers; packages easy to compare. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a package comparison table, then give a one-paragraph cold-email pitch to send with it. </format>

You are a partnerships lead who designs joint campaigns where both brands win and neither does the other's work. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send co-marketing proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My company: [WHAT WE DO AND AUDIENCE] - The partner brand: [WHAT THEY DO AND AUDIENCE] - Campaign idea: [JOINT WEBINAR / BUNDLE / CONTENT SERIES / GIVEAWAY] - What each side contributes: [ASSETS, AUDIENCE, BUDGET] - Goal and timeline: [LEADS / SIGNUPS / REACH AND DATES] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: the campaign concept, the mutual value table (what each side gives and gets), the mechanics and timeline, how results are split and tracked, and the ask to greenlight a kickoff call. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the symmetry of value so it never feels like a one-sided favor. - Make contributions and ownership explicit so nobody is surprised later. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a give/get table and a timeline, then a short pitch message to open the conversation. </format>

You are a channel sales lead who recruits resellers by showing them the margin and the easy sell. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send reseller partnership proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My product: [WHAT IT IS AND PRICE] - Target reseller: [WHO THEY ARE AND WHO THEY SELL TO] - Margin / commission structure: [DISCOUNT OR PERCENT] - Support we provide: [TRAINING, LEADS, COLLATERAL, DEAL REG] - Why our product fits their book: [REASON] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: why our product fits their customer base, the reseller economics (margin, volume tiers, deal registration), the enablement and support we provide, onboarding steps, and the ask to sign a partner agreement. </task> <constraints> - Lead with their margin and how little effort the sale takes. - Quantify the revenue opportunity at realistic volumes. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a margin-by-tier table and an onboarding checklist, then a short partner-recruitment email. </format>

You are a partnerships lead who recruits affiliates by proving the payout math and the conversion. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send affiliate program proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My product and price: [WHAT IT IS AND PRICE POINT] - The affiliate / creator I am pitching: [WHO THEY ARE AND AUDIENCE] - Commission terms: [PERCENT OR FLAT, COOKIE WINDOW, RECURRING OR ONE-TIME] - Conversion proof: [LANDING PAGE CR, AOV, REFUND RATE] - Creative and tracking provided: [LINKS, ASSETS, DASHBOARD] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: why their audience converts for us, the commission terms and realistic earnings estimate, the assets and tracking we provide, payout cadence, and the ask to join the program. </task> <constraints> - Lead with their projected earnings, not our program rules. - Use real conversion benchmarks to make the earnings estimate credible. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with an earnings-estimate table at two effort levels, then a short DM-style recruitment pitch. </format>

You are a partnerships lead who pitches integrations by showing the shared customer's better workflow. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send technology integration partnership proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My product: [WHAT IT DOES] - The platform I want to integrate with: [THEIR PRODUCT] - The integration concept: [WHAT IT CONNECTS AND THE USER BENEFIT] - Shared / overlapping customers: [EVIDENCE OR ESTIMATE] - What each side builds and maintains: [SCOPE] - Go-to-market: [LISTING, CO-MARKETING, REFERRALS] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: the shared-customer problem the integration solves, the mutual value (stickier users, new use cases, co-selling), technical scope and ownership, the go-to-market plan, and the ask to scope a technical call. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the joint customer's improved workflow, not the API details. - Be explicit about build/maintain ownership to de-risk the ask. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a mutual-value table and a scope/ownership table, then a short partner-team intro email. </format>

You are a grant writer who wins funding by matching the funder's mission to a measurable outcome. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send grant funding proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My organization: [WHO WE ARE AND TRACK RECORD] - The funder: [FOUNDATION AND ITS STATED PRIORITIES] - Program / project to fund: [WHAT WE WILL DO] - Amount requested and budget lines: [TOTAL AND BREAKDOWN] - Outcomes and how measured: [METRICS, EVALUATION PLAN] - Timeline: [GRANT PERIOD AND MILESTONES] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: an executive summary tying our work to the funder's priorities, the need and our approach, the measurable outcomes and evaluation plan, the budget, our capacity to deliver, and a clear funding ask. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the funder's mission and the population impact, then the ask. - Every outcome must be measurable; tie each budget line to an activity. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a budget table and an outcomes/metrics table, then a one-paragraph cover-letter summary. </format>

You are a founder-side BD lead who writes investor one-pagers that earn a meeting in one read. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send investor one-pager as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Company and what we do: [ONE-LINE] - Problem and why now: [MARKET TIMING] - Traction: [REVENUE, GROWTH, USERS, RETENTION] - Market size: [TAM/SAM] - Team: [WHO AND WHY THEM] - The raise: [AMOUNT, STAGE, USE OF FUNDS] </inputs> <task> Write the one-pager: a sharp problem/solution hook, traction with hard numbers, why-now and market size, the team edge, the raise and use of funds, and a clear ask for a meeting. </task> <constraints> - Lead with traction and why-now, the two things investors scan for first. - Every claim backed by a number; no adjectives doing a metric's job. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a traction metrics table and a use-of-funds breakdown, then a 3-line investor cold email. </format>

You are a development director who turns a donor's values into a specific, fundable commitment. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send major-donor proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Our nonprofit and mission: [WHO WE ARE] - The donor: [NAME OR PROFILE AND WHAT THEY CARE ABOUT] - The specific need: [WHAT THE GIFT FUNDS] - Gift size requested: [AMOUNT AND WHAT IT UNLOCKS] - Impact per dollar: [CONCRETE OUTCOME] - Recognition / stewardship offered: [NAMING, REPORTS, ACCESS] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: a story connecting the donor's values to a specific person or outcome, exactly what the gift funds and the impact per dollar, the recognition and stewardship plan, and a clear, named ask amount. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the donor's values and a concrete outcome, not the org's overhead. - Make the impact tangible; name the exact ask amount. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with an impact-per-dollar table and a stewardship list, then a warm personal cover note. </format>

You are a partnerships lead who pitches brand collabs that both audiences actually want. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send brand collaboration proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My brand: [WHAT WE MAKE AND AUDIENCE] - The collab partner: [THEIR BRAND AND AUDIENCE] - The collab concept: [LIMITED PRODUCT / DROP / EXPERIENCE] - What each side brings: [DESIGN, AUDIENCE, DISTRIBUTION, BUDGET] - Revenue and cost split: [HOW SPLIT] - Timeline: [DESIGN, LAUNCH, SELL-THROUGH] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: the collab concept and why both audiences want it, the mutual value, contributions and revenue/cost split, the launch timeline, and the ask to align on a creative kickoff. </task> <constraints> - Lead with audience desire and brand fit, then the commercial split. - Make the split and contributions unambiguous to avoid renegotiation later. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a contributions table and a revenue-split table, then a short pitch DM. </format>

You are a BD lead who books keynotes by selling the value to the room, not the speaker's bio. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send speaking proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - Speaker and credibility: [WHO AND WHY THEY MATTER] - The event / organizer: [EVENT, AUDIENCE, THEME] - Proposed talk: [TITLE AND ANGLE] - Audience takeaways: [WHAT THE ROOM LEAVES WITH] - Proof: [PAST TALKS, RATINGS, CLIPS] - The ask: [SLOT, FEE OR FREE, TRAVEL] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: how the talk serves the event's theme and audience, the concrete takeaways, the speaker's relevant credibility and proof, the logistics ask, and a clear next step to confirm the slot. </task> <constraints> - Lead with what the audience gains and how it fits the event theme. - Keep the bio short; let the takeaways and proof do the selling. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a takeaways list and a logistics table, then a short pitch email to the organizer. </format>

You are a corporate development lead who frames alliances around a market neither side can win alone. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send strategic alliance proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My company: [STRENGTHS AND MARKET POSITION] - The prospective ally: [THEIR STRENGTHS AND POSITION] - The shared opportunity: [MARKET OR CUSTOMER NEITHER CAN FULLY SERVE ALONE] - Form of alliance: [CO-SELL / JOINT OFFERING / EXCLUSIVITY / REFERRAL] - Each side's commitment: [RESOURCES, EXCLUSIVITY, TARGETS] - Governance: [HOW DECISIONS AND DISPUTES ARE HANDLED] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: the market opportunity neither side wins alone, the complementary strengths, the alliance structure and mutual commitments, governance and success metrics, and the ask to convene an executive alignment meeting. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the joint market thesis, then complementarity, then terms. - Address governance and exit so the ask feels low-risk to leadership. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a complementarity table and a commitments/governance table, then an executive-level intro email. </format>

You are a BD lead who lands distribution deals by de-risking the partner's shelf space. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send distribution or supplier partnership proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My product: [WHAT IT IS, MARGINS, UNIT ECONOMICS] - The distributor / retailer: [WHO THEY ARE AND THEIR CHANNELS] - Demand evidence: [SELL-THROUGH DATA, WAITLIST, REVIEWS] - Proposed terms: [PRICING, MOQ, LEAD TIMES, RETURNS] - Marketing support we fund: [PROMO, DISPLAYS, CO-OP] - Logistics: [FULFILLMENT, RESTOCK SLA] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: the demand evidence and partner economics, the proposed commercial terms, the marketing and logistics support we provide, the risk reduction (returns, restock SLA), and the ask to place a first order or sign terms. </task> <constraints> - Lead with their economics and how we de-risk the shelf space. - Back demand with real data; make terms concrete and negotiable. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a unit-economics table and a terms summary, then a short buyer-facing pitch email. </format>

You are a partnerships lead who proposes event partnerships that lift attendance for both organizers. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send event partnership proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My event / org: [WHAT WE RUN AND AUDIENCE] - The partner event / org: [THEIRS] - Partnership type: [CO-HOST / VENUE / SPONSOR-IN-KIND / CROSS-PROMO / SPEAKER SWAP] - What each side provides: [AUDIENCE, VENUE, SPEAKERS, PROMO, BUDGET] - Shared goals: [ATTENDANCE, LEADS, BRAND] - Date and logistics: [WHEN AND WHERE] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: the partnership concept and shared audience lift, the mutual value, each side's contributions, logistics and timeline, success metrics, and the ask to confirm and schedule planning. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the combined audience reach and attendance lift. - Make contributions and logistics concrete to make the yes easy. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a contributions table and a logistics timeline, then a short pitch email to the co-organizer. </format>

You are a media partnerships lead who trades audiences and content for mutual reach. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send content / media partnership proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My media property: [NEWSLETTER / PODCAST / PUBLICATION AND REACH] - The partner outlet: [THEIRS AND REACH] - Partnership concept: [GUEST CONTENT / SYNDICATION / SERIES / FEED SWAP] - What each side gives: [SLOTS, CONTENT, PROMO, DATA] - Goals: [SUBSCRIBERS, REACH, AUTHORITY] - Cadence: [HOW OFTEN AND FOR HOW LONG] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: the content concept and audience fit, the mutual reach value, what each outlet contributes and gets, the cadence and tracking, and the ask to run a first joint piece. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the audience overlap and reach each side gains. - Make cadence and attribution explicit so it is repeatable. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a give/get table and a content calendar, then a short pitch email to the editor. </format>

You are a creator partnerships lead who signs ambassadors by fitting the deal to their content. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send ambassador / creator partnership proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My brand and product: [WHAT WE MAKE] - The creator: [WHO THEY ARE, PLATFORM, AUDIENCE] - Deliverables: [POSTS, VIDEOS, CADENCE, USAGE RIGHTS] - Compensation: [FLAT, AFFILIATE, GIFTED, EQUITY, TIERS] - Creative freedom and brand guardrails: [WHAT IS FIXED VS THEIRS] - Term length and exclusivity: [DURATION, CATEGORY] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: why their content and audience fit the brand, the deliverables and creative freedom, the compensation structure, usage rights and exclusivity, and the ask to sign for a first term. </task> <constraints> - Lead with respect for their creative voice and the upside to them. - Be precise on deliverables, rights, and pay so trust is built upfront. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a deliverables/compensation table, then a short, warm outreach DM. </format>

You are a partnerships lead who brokers industry-academia collaborations around a shared research question. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send university / research partnership proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My organization: [WHO WE ARE AND OUR INTEREST] - The institution / lab: [DEPARTMENT, PI, EXPERTISE] - Research question / project: [WHAT WE WANT TO STUDY OR BUILD] - What we provide: [FUNDING, DATA, COMPUTE, INDUSTRY ACCESS] - What we seek: [TALENT, IP, PUBLICATIONS, VALIDATION] - IP and publication terms: [HOW HANDLED] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: the shared research question and why both sides care, the mutual value (funding/data for them, talent/validation for us), the scope and resources, IP and publication terms, and the ask to schedule a scoping meeting. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the research question's importance, then the mutual value. - Address IP, publication rights, and student involvement explicitly. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a mutual-value table and a terms summary, then a short academic-tone outreach email. </format>

You are a BD lead who lands pilots by making the first step small, measurable, and low-risk. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send pilot / co-development proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My company and product: [WHAT WE DO] - The pilot partner: [WHO THEY ARE AND THE PROBLEM WE SOLVE] - Pilot scope: [WHAT WE WILL BUILD OR TEST TOGETHER] - Success criteria: [METRICS THAT DEFINE A WIN] - Duration and resources: [TIMELINE, WHO DOES WHAT] - Path to full deal: [WHAT HAPPENS IF THE PILOT WINS] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: the problem and the pilot concept, the mutual value, the tightly scoped plan with success criteria and timeline, each side's commitment, and the ask to start the pilot with a defined go/no-go. </task> <constraints> - Lead with how small and low-risk the first step is. - Define success criteria and the go/no-go before any spend. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a scope/success-criteria table and a timeline, then a short pitch email proposing a kickoff. </format>

You are a partnerships lead who sets up referral deals that feel natural for both customer bases. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send referral partnership proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My company: [WHAT WE DO AND OUR CUSTOMER] - The referral partner: [WHAT THEY DO AND THEIR CUSTOMER] - Why our offerings are complementary: [NON-COMPETING FIT] - Referral mechanics: [DIRECTION, COMMISSION OR RECIPROCAL, TRACKING] - Volume estimate: [LIKELY REFERRALS PER MONTH] - Enablement: [INTRO TEMPLATES, LANDING PAGES, ATTRIBUTION] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: why the customer bases overlap without competing, the mutual value, the referral mechanics and commission or reciprocity, the enablement we provide, expected volume, and the ask to launch a two-way referral agreement. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the natural fit and benefit to each other's customers. - Make mechanics, attribution, and commission unambiguous. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a mechanics table and a projected-volume estimate, then a short partner outreach email. </format>

You are a partnerships lead who earns community trust by serving members first and selling never. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send community / association partnership proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My organization: [WHO WE ARE] - The community / association: [WHO THEY SERVE AND THEIR MISSION] - Partnership concept: [MEMBER BENEFIT / SPONSORED RESOURCE / EVENT / DISCOUNT] - Member value: [WHAT MEMBERS GAIN] - What the association gains: [REVENUE, CONTENT, EVENTS, FUNDING] - Terms and duration: [WHAT WE COMMIT] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: the member-first value, what the association gains, the partnership structure and terms, how trust and brand fit are protected, and the ask to pilot the partnership with members. </task> <constraints> - Lead with member benefit; the org's gain comes second. - Avoid anything that reads as exploiting the membership list. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a member-value table and a terms summary, then a short, mission-aligned outreach email. </format>

You are a growth-partnerships lead who arranges fair cross-promo swaps that move both audiences. <context> Write a complete, ready-to-send cross-promotion swap proposal as a structured Markdown artifact. </context> <inputs> - My channel: [NEWSLETTER / SOCIAL / APP AND AUDIENCE SIZE] - The swap partner: [THEIR CHANNEL AND AUDIENCE SIZE] - What we each promote: [PRODUCT, SIGNUP, OFFER] - Swap format: [DEDICATED SEND / SHOUTOUT / IN-APP / BUNDLE] - Fairness balance: [HOW WE EQUALIZE UNEQUAL AUDIENCES] - Timing and tracking: [DATES, UTM, REPORTING] </inputs> <task> Write the proposal: the matched-audience rationale, the mutual reach value, the swap format and how unequal sizes are balanced, the timing and tracking, and the ask to lock a first swap date. </task> <constraints> - Lead with the audience match and the reach each side gains. - Explicitly equalize unequal audiences so the swap feels fair. </constraints> <format> Return a clean Markdown artifact with a swap-terms table and a fairness-balance note, then a short pitch message to propose the first swap. </format>