30 Claude Prompts for Salesforce

You are a Salesforce database administrator who writes SOQL for data cleanup projects. <context> I suspect we have duplicate contact records across accounts and I need a query to surface them before running a dedupe tool. </context> <inputs> - Object: [CONTACT] - Fields to match on: [EMAIL AND LAST NAME] - Account scope: [ALL ACCOUNTS OR SPECIFIC RECORD TYPE] - Exclude records created before: [DATE] - Row limit: [ROW LIMIT NUMBER] </inputs> <task> Write a SOQL query, or a short set of queries if SOQL alone cannot group and count, that identifies contacts with matching email addresses across different account records. </task> <constraints> Note clearly if the grouping logic requires Apex or a report instead of raw SOQL, since SOQL has limited aggregate support. Keep the query under the standard governor limit assumptions. Do not invent field names that do not exist in standard Salesforce. </constraints> <format> Return as: the SOQL query in a code block, a one line explanation of each clause, and a note on any limitation. </format>

You are a Salesforce administrator who writes SOQL queries for sales operations requests. <context> A sales manager asked me for every open opportunity closing this quarter above a certain size, and I want to hand this to them as a query I can also turn into a list view. </context> <inputs> - Object: [OPPORTUNITY] - Stage exclusions: [CLOSED WON, CLOSED LOST] - Close date range: [THIS QUARTER] - Minimum amount: [DOLLAR AMOUNT] - Fields to return: [NAME, AMOUNT, STAGE, OWNER, CLOSE DATE] </inputs> <task> Write the SOQL query for this filter set, plus the equivalent list view filter logic so I can create both a query and a shareable list view from the same spec. </task> <constraints> Use relative date literals like THIS_QUARTER where appropriate instead of hardcoded dates. Keep field names to standard Opportunity fields unless I specify a custom field. State any indexing consideration if the org is large. </constraints> <format> Return as: SOQL Query, List View Filter Equivalent, and a short Performance Note. </format>

You are a Salesforce data quality specialist who audits orphaned and broken relationship records. <context> After a data import last quarter I think some records lost their parent account or owner link, and I need to find them before the next sync run. </context> <inputs> - Object to audit: [OPPORTUNITY OR CONTACT] - Relationship field to check: [ACCOUNT ID OR OWNER ID] - Import batch marker if any: [IMPORT BATCH FIELD] - Date range of the suspect import: [DATE RANGE] - Row limit: [ROW LIMIT NUMBER] </inputs> <task> Write a SOQL query that finds records with a null or invalid parent relationship field within the given date range, and suggest a follow up query to count them by record type. </task> <constraints> Assume standard Salesforce relationship fields unless told otherwise. Flag if a null check on a lookup field needs special syntax. Keep the explanation short and technical, this is for an admin, not an executive. </constraints> <format> Return as: Primary SOQL Query, Follow Up Count Query, and a one paragraph Root Cause Hypothesis. </format>

You are a Salesforce administrator who investigates unexpected field value changes using field history tracking. <context> A deal amount changed without explanation and I need to trace who changed it and when using the field history related object. </context> <inputs> - Object with history tracking: [OPPORTUNITY] - Field being investigated: [AMOUNT OR STAGE] - Record ID or filter: [RECORD ID OR OPPORTUNITY NAME] - Date range: [LAST 30 DAYS] - History object name: [OPPORTUNITYFIELDHISTORY] </inputs> <task> Write a SOQL query against the field history object that returns old value, new value, changed by, and changed date for the specified field and record, ordered chronologically. </task> <constraints> Note that field history tracking must already be enabled on that field or the query will return nothing, and explain how to check that setting. Keep field names accurate to Salesforce's actual history object schema. </constraints> <format> Return as: SOQL Query, Prerequisite Check, and Expected Output Columns. </format>

You are a Salesforce database administrator supporting an annual data hygiene project. <context> We want to archive or flag accounts with no activity and no open opportunities in over a year, and I need the query to generate that candidate list. </context> <inputs> - Object: [ACCOUNT] - No activity since: [DATE THRESHOLD] - Related object to check for open deals: [OPPORTUNITY] - Account owner filter: [ALL OWNERS OR SPECIFIC TEAM] - Row limit: [ROW LIMIT NUMBER] </inputs> <task> Write a SOQL query, using a subquery against related opportunities, that returns accounts with no activity since the threshold date and no open opportunities, as candidates for archiving. </task> <constraints> Use a NOT IN or subquery pattern correctly since this involves excluding accounts that do have related open records. Do not suggest deleting anything, this is a candidate list for review only. </constraints> <format> Return as: SOQL Query with subquery, an explanation of the exclusion logic, and a Suggested Next Step for the reviewed list. </format>

You are a Salesforce administrator who writes validation rules that enforce clean pipeline data without frustrating reps. <context> Reps keep pushing close dates without explanation, and I want a validation rule that forces a reason whenever a close date moves more than a few days. </context> <inputs> - Object: [OPPORTUNITY] - Field being changed: [CLOSE DATE] - Reason field to require: [CLOSE DATE CHANGE REASON] - Threshold in days that triggers the rule: [NUMBER OF DAYS] - Stages to exclude from the rule: [CLOSED WON, CLOSED LOST] </inputs> <task> Write the validation rule formula that requires the reason field to be filled whenever the close date is pushed out by more than the threshold, and explain the ISCHANGED and PRIORVALUE logic used. </task> <constraints> Use standard Salesforce formula syntax exactly as it would be typed into the rule builder. Exclude closed stages so reps are not blocked when closing a deal. Keep the error message under 255 characters. </constraints> <format> Return as: Formula (in a code block), Error Condition Formula, Error Message text, and Error Location. </format>

You are a Salesforce administrator enforcing a defined sales process through validation rules. <context> Reps mark deals as Negotiation or later without ever filling in the fields our process requires at that stage, and I want a rule that blocks the save until those fields exist. </context> <inputs> - Object: [OPPORTUNITY] - Stage that triggers the rule: [NEGOTIATION OR LATER] - Required fields at that stage: [FIELD LIST] - Field that identifies the stage: [STAGENAME] - Roles exempt from the rule if any: [SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR] </inputs> <task> Write the validation rule formula that blocks saving an opportunity into the specified stage unless the required fields are populated, and account for the admin exemption using the profile or permission check. </task> <constraints> Use ISBLANK checks combined with OR logic across the required fields. Keep the formula readable with clear line breaks. Do not exempt regular sales roles, only the stated admin exemption. </constraints> <format> Return as: Formula (in a code block), Error Message text, and a short Testing Checklist. </format>

You are a Salesforce data quality consultant preparing an audit before a lead scoring project goes live. <context> We are about to turn on lead scoring and I need to confirm the underlying fields are clean enough that the score will mean something. </context> <inputs> - Fields the score depends on: [FIELD LIST] - Lead source values in use: [LIST OF VALUES] - Approximate lead volume per month: [NUMBER] - Known problem areas: [FREE TEXT FIELDS OR DUPLICATE SOURCES] - Timeline before launch: [NUMBER OF WEEKS] </inputs> <task> Build a data quality audit checklist covering completeness, consistency, and duplication for the fields the score depends on, with a way to measure each one in Salesforce. </task> <constraints> Make each checklist item something that can be checked with a report or a query, not a vague statement. Order items by how much they would break the scoring model if left unfixed. Keep it to one page. </constraints> <format> Return as a checklist with columns: Check Item, How to Measure It in Salesforce, Risk if Unfixed. </format>

You are a Salesforce administrator who prevents process breakdowns through targeted validation logic. <context> Reps sometimes create a second open opportunity on an account that already has one for the same product line, and duplicate rules alone are not catching it. </context> <inputs> - Object: [OPPORTUNITY] - Field identifying product line: [PRODUCT LINE FIELD] - Account relationship field: [ACCOUNTID] - Stages considered open: [PROSPECTING THROUGH NEGOTIATION] - Whether Apex is acceptable if SOQL is required: [YES OR NO] </inputs> <task> Explain whether this check can be done with a native validation rule alone, or whether it requires an Apex trigger because validation rules cannot query other records, and provide the recommended approach with the actual logic. </task> <constraints> Be honest about the technical limitation, do not pretend a validation rule formula can query sibling records when it cannot. If Apex is needed, describe the trigger logic in plain steps rather than full code unless asked. </constraints> <format> Return as: Feasibility Verdict, Recommended Approach, and Step by Step Logic. </format>

You are a Salesforce administrator tightening data entry rules for lead and contact records. <context> We get bad email addresses entered by reps in a hurry, including free email domains on records that should have a company domain, and I want a validation rule to catch the obvious cases. </context> <inputs> - Object: [LEAD OR CONTACT] - Email field: [EMAIL] - Free email domains to flag: [DOMAIN LIST] - Record types this applies to: [RECORD TYPE] - Whether to block or just warn: [BLOCK OR WARN] </inputs> <task> Write a validation rule formula that checks the email field format is plausible and flags or blocks entries using the listed free email domains, based on the block or warn preference. </task> <constraints> Use CONTAINS and regex functions correctly for Salesforce formula syntax. If warn only is chosen, explain that Salesforce validation rules cannot warn without blocking, and suggest the actual alternative such as a screen flow message. </constraints> <format> Return as: Formula (in a code block), Error Message text, and a Note on the block versus warn limitation. </format>

You are a sales operations manager who preps 1:1 pipeline reviews for frontline managers using Salesforce data. <context> Our managers run pipeline reviews from a raw opportunity export and it takes too long to know what to ask about each deal. </context> <inputs> - Rep name: [REP NAME] - Number of open deals to review: [NUMBER] - Fields available in the export: [FIELD LIST] - Deals flagged as at risk: [DEAL NAMES OR CRITERIA] - Review length: [MINUTES] </inputs> <task> Create a pipeline review script with specific questions to ask about each flagged deal, based on the fields available, so the manager can run a tight review inside the time limit. </task> <constraints> Questions must reference real Salesforce fields, not generic sales coaching language. Prioritize the flagged at risk deals first. Keep the whole script inside the stated time limit at roughly two minutes per deal. </constraints> <format> Return as a run of show: Opening (1 line), then per deal a Question Set (3 questions), then a Closing Action Item line. </format>

You are a sales operations analyst who builds accountability scorecards from Salesforce pipeline data. <context> I want to rank reps by how clean their pipeline is, not just how big it is, since messy data undermines the whole forecast. </context> <inputs> - Hygiene signals available: [MISSING NEXT STEP, MISSING CLOSE DATE, STALE STAGE] - Team roster: [REP NAMES] - Scoring scale: [0 TO 100 OR LETTER GRADE] - Weight given to each signal: [WEIGHTING] - Reporting cadence: [WEEKLY OR MONTHLY] </inputs> <task> Design a pipeline hygiene scorecard formula that combines the listed signals into a single score per rep, and explain how each signal should be weighted and why. </task> <constraints> Keep the formula simple enough to compute in a spreadsheet from a Salesforce report export, no code required. Avoid shaming language, frame it as a coaching tool. State clearly what counts as a passing score. </constraints> <format> Return as: Scoring Formula, Weight Table, Passing Threshold, and a one paragraph Coaching Framing. </format>

You are a sales enablement manager who writes clear cleanup instructions for reps before quarter close. <context> Every quarter we scramble to get reps to clean their pipeline before the forecast call, and generic reminders do not get acted on. </context> <inputs> - Quarter end date: [DATE] - Cleanup tasks required: [UPDATE CLOSE DATES, CONFIRM STAGE, LOG NEXT STEP] - Deadline for completion: [DATE AND TIME] - Consequence for not completing: [FREE TEXT] - Tool reps use to update records: [SALESFORCE MOBILE OR DESKTOP] </inputs> <task> Write a short, direct set of cleanup instructions for reps that lists exactly what to check on each open deal before the deadline, in an order that takes the least time. </task> <constraints> Write in plain, direct language a rep will actually read, not a corporate memo. Keep it under 200 words. Include the deadline and consequence exactly once each, do not repeat them. </constraints> <format> Return as a short message with a bolded deadline line, a numbered task list of 3 to 5 items, and one closing line. </format>

You are a sales operations manager who triages aging pipeline before a leadership forecast review. <context> We have a long list of deals that have sat in stage far longer than our average sales cycle and I need a plan to work through them before Friday. </context> <inputs> - Average sales cycle length: [NUMBER OF DAYS] - Number of aging deals: [NUMBER] - Stages most affected: [STAGE LIST] - Owners of the aging deals: [REP NAMES OR TEAM] - Deadline to have this resolved: [DATE] </inputs> <task> Create a triage plan that groups the aging deals into categories such as genuinely still active, needs to be pushed to next quarter, or should be marked closed lost, and assign an action and owner for each category. </task> <constraints> Base the triage categories on realistic deal behavior, not just age. Keep the plan actionable within the stated deadline. Do not recommend mass closing deals without rep confirmation. </constraints> <format> Return as a table with columns: Category, Criteria, Recommended Action, Who Owns the Follow Up. </format>

You are a sales operations manager running a short campaign to fix a chronically empty next step field. <context> Our next step field on opportunities is blank on most open deals and it is the single biggest gap in our pipeline reviews. </context> <inputs> - Percentage of open deals missing the field currently: [PERCENTAGE] - Target percentage after the campaign: [PERCENTAGE] - Campaign length: [NUMBER OF WEEKS] - Manager incentive if any: [FREE TEXT] - Reporting method to track progress: [REPORT NAME] </inputs> <task> Design a short campaign plan to move the completion rate from the current percentage to the target, including a weekly check in cadence and a way to publicly track progress without shaming individuals. </task> <constraints> Keep the campaign length realistic and short, not an ongoing program. Tie every step back to the specific report used to measure progress. Avoid leaderboard formats that single out low performers by name in a wide distribution. </constraints> <format> Return as: Campaign Timeline (week by week), Tracking Method, and Manager Talking Points for the kickoff. </format>

You are a Salesforce administrator who designs dashboards for a company's leadership team. <context> Our CRO wants a single dashboard she can glance at before her Monday leadership meeting instead of asking me for numbers every week. </context> <inputs> - Audience: [CRO OR VP OF SALES] - Metrics she cares about most: [PIPELINE, COVERAGE, WIN RATE, FORECAST] - Number of dashboard components allowed: [NUMBER] - Refresh cadence: [DAILY OR WEEKLY] - Underlying reports already built: [REPORT NAMES] </inputs> <task> Plan the dashboard layout, specifying which component type to use for each metric, the source report for each, and the order they should appear so the most important number is seen first. </task> <constraints> Stay within the stated component limit. Choose component types, such as gauge, bar chart, or metric, that actually fit each metric rather than defaulting to bar charts everywhere. Avoid cramming detail meant for a report into a dashboard component. </constraints> <format> Return as a table with columns: Position, Component Type, Metric, Source Report, Why This Type. </format>

You are a Salesforce administrator supporting a sales organization spread across multiple regions. <context> Each regional VP wants to see the same dashboard but filtered to their own region, and I do not want to build and maintain five separate dashboards. </context> <inputs> - Number of regions: [NUMBER] - Field used to define region: [REGION FIELD] - Dashboard viewers per region: [ROLE OR USER LIST] - Existing dashboard name: [DASHBOARD NAME] - Salesforce edition or feature availability: [EDITION] </inputs> <task> Recommend the correct Salesforce mechanism, such as dynamic dashboards with a running user, or dashboard filters, to serve region specific views from one dashboard, and explain the setup steps. </task> <constraints> Base the recommendation on what is actually available at the stated edition level, do not recommend a feature that requires a higher tier without flagging it. Keep the setup steps in the order they must be done. </constraints> <format> Return as: Recommended Mechanism, Why It Fits, and Setup Steps in order. </format>

You are a revenue operations lead who translates Salesforce dashboard numbers into a written narrative for a board update. <context> Our board deck needs three sentences summarizing pipeline health this quarter, and I only have the raw dashboard numbers in front of me. </context> <inputs> - Total pipeline value: [DOLLAR AMOUNT] - Coverage ratio: [RATIO] - Win rate this quarter versus last: [PERCENTAGES] - Notable risk: [FREE TEXT] - Tone expected by the board: [DIRECT OR CAUTIOUS] </inputs> <task> Write a three to four sentence narrative summary of pipeline health using these numbers, that a board would find informative rather than a plain restatement of the figures. </task> <constraints> Do not simply list the numbers, interpret what they mean for the quarter. Name the risk plainly if one exists, do not soften it into vague language. Keep it to one short paragraph. </constraints> <format> Return as a single paragraph, no bullet points, ready to paste into board deck notes. </format>

You are a Salesforce administrator cleaning up a dashboard library that has grown unmanaged over several years. <context> We have dozens of dashboards and nobody knows which ones are still used, and I need a plan to audit and retire the dead ones. </context> <inputs> - Number of dashboards in the org: [NUMBER] - Data available on last viewed date: [YES OR NO] - Owners who have left the company: [NAMES OR TEAMS] - Retention rule proposal: [FREE TEXT OR NONE YET] - Timeline for the cleanup: [WEEKS] </inputs> <task> Build a step by step audit plan to identify which dashboards are unused, confirm with remaining stakeholders before deleting anything, and propose a retention rule going forward so the library does not grow unmanaged again. </task> <constraints> Always require a stakeholder confirmation step before deletion, never suggest deleting based on last viewed date alone. Keep the plan realistic for the stated timeline. Include a rule for new dashboard creation going forward. </constraints> <format> Return as: Audit Steps in order, Confirmation Process, and a Going Forward Retention Rule. </format>

You are a sales enablement manager who designs dashboards that track new hire ramp progress in Salesforce. <context> We hire reps in cohorts and I want a dashboard that shows whether each new rep is on pace against our standard ramp milestones. </context> <inputs> - Ramp milestones and expected timing: [MILESTONE LIST WITH DAYS] - Cohort size: [NUMBER OF REPS] - Start date of the cohort: [DATE] - Metrics available per rep: [ACTIVITIES, PIPELINE CREATED, FIRST DEAL CLOSED] - Manager audience: [SALES MANAGERS OR ENABLEMENT TEAM] </inputs> <task> Design a ramp tracking dashboard that plots each new rep's actual progress against the expected milestone timing, so a manager can see at a glance who is ahead or behind pace. </task> <constraints> Use a component type suited to comparing actual versus expected over time, not a simple table. Group by cohort so managers can compare rep to rep within the same start date. Keep the design usable for future cohorts without rebuilding it each time. </constraints> <format> Return as: Component List with type and metric, Grouping Logic, and a Reusability Note for future cohorts. </format>

You are a Salesforce administrator who designs record triggered flows to reduce manual pipeline monitoring. <context> I want a flow that automatically flags an opportunity as at risk when it meets certain conditions, instead of a manager having to spot it manually. </context> <inputs> - Object: [OPPORTUNITY] - Risk conditions: [NO ACTIVITY IN 14 DAYS AND STAGE UNCHANGED] - Field to update when flagged: [RISK FLAG FIELD] - Notification target: [OPPORTUNITY OWNER OR MANAGER] - Flow type: [RECORD TRIGGERED FLOW] </inputs> <task> Design the flow logic step by step, including the entry conditions, the decision element, the field update, and the notification action, so an admin can build it directly in Flow Builder. </task> <constraints> Use Flow Builder terminology such as Get Records, Decision, and Update Records rather than Apex code. Specify the entry condition precisely so the flow does not fire on every save. Avoid recursive flow triggers. </constraints> <format> Return as a numbered list of Flow Builder elements in order, each with its configuration. </format>

You are a Salesforce administrator building an approval process for sales discount requests. <context> Reps currently email a manager for discount approval and it gets lost, and I want this inside Salesforce as a proper approval process on the opportunity. </context> <inputs> - Object: [OPPORTUNITY] - Discount threshold that triggers approval: [PERCENTAGE] - Approval chain: [MANAGER THEN VP FOR LARGER DISCOUNTS] - Field that records approval status: [APPROVAL STATUS FIELD] - What should happen while pending: [LOCK RECORD OR JUST FLAG] </inputs> <task> Design the approval process steps, including entry criteria, the approval chain logic for different discount tiers, and what happens to the record while approval is pending. </task> <constraints> Use actual Salesforce approval process terminology such as entry criteria, approval steps, and final approval actions. Handle the tiered approval chain correctly, do not send every request to the VP regardless of size. State the field lock behavior explicitly. </constraints> <format> Return as: Entry Criteria, Approval Steps in order with approver logic, Final Approval Actions, Final Rejection Actions. </format>

You are a Salesforce administrator redesigning lead assignment rules for fairness and speed. <context> Our current assignment rule sends leads to whoever is first in a static list and it has become unbalanced as the team grew, and I need a redesign. </context> <inputs> - Current assignment method: [ROUND ROBIN OR TERRITORY BASED] - Number of reps in rotation: [NUMBER] - Lead source segments that need different routing: [SEGMENT LIST] - Field used for territory if applicable: [TERRITORY FIELD] - Tool available: [NATIVE ASSIGNMENT RULES OR FLOW] </inputs> <task> Redesign the lead assignment logic to distribute leads evenly across the rep rotation while still respecting the segment based routing rules, and specify whether native assignment rules or a flow based approach fits better. </task> <constraints> Explain the tradeoff between native lead assignment rules and a flow based round robin if relevant, native rules cannot easily do true round robin natively. Keep the segment routing rules intact, do not simplify them away. </constraints> <format> Return as: Recommended Approach, Routing Logic by Segment, and Rotation Mechanism. </format>

You are a Salesforce administrator configuring native duplicate and matching rules for lead and contact records. <context> We rely on reps to manually spot duplicates and it does not work, and I want to configure Salesforce's built in duplicate management properly. </context> <inputs> - Objects to cover: [LEAD AND CONTACT] - Matching fields to use: [EMAIL, LAST NAME, COMPANY] - Match sensitivity: [EXACT OR FUZZY] - Action on duplicate detected: [BLOCK OR ALERT] - Existing duplicate records to handle separately: [YES OR NO] </inputs> <task> Configure the matching rule criteria and the duplicate rule action settings, and explain the difference between the two components since they are configured separately in Salesforce. </task> <constraints> Be precise about the actual Salesforce feature split, matching rules define what counts as a match, duplicate rules define what happens when a match is found. Recommend alert over block for lead creation unless there is a strong reason to block entirely. </constraints> <format> Return as: Matching Rule Criteria, Duplicate Rule Action Settings, and a Note on Existing Duplicates. </format>

You are a Salesforce administrator who builds screen flows to guide reps through multi step processes. <context> Reps forget steps when closing a deal, like updating the contract field or notifying finance, and I want a guided screen flow instead of relying on memory. </context> <inputs> - Object: [OPPORTUNITY] - Steps required at closeout: [STEP LIST] - Trigger for launching the flow: [BUTTON ON RECORD PAGE] - Fields the flow should update: [FIELD LIST] - Team to notify at the end: [FINANCE OR ONBOARDING] </inputs> <task> Design a screen flow with one screen per required step, the field updates each screen should perform, and the final action that notifies the specified team when the flow completes. </task> <constraints> Keep each screen focused on one step only, do not cram multiple unrelated updates onto one screen. Specify the trigger clearly as a Lightning record page button, not an automatic trigger, since this needs rep input. Include a confirmation screen at the end. </constraints> <format> Return as a numbered list of Screens in order, each with its Purpose, Fields Shown, and Action on Next. </format>