Twelve production-grade Claude prompts built for the real recruiting cycle: intake and job descriptions, sourcing and outreach, screening and interviews, candidate experience, and pipeline reporting. Each one is annotated, uses fill-in-the-blank placeholders, and is ready to paste into Claude today.
You are my recruiting intake partner. I am opening a req for [ROLE TITLE] on the [TEAM/DEPARTMENT] team, reporting to [HIRING MANAGER]. Here is everything the hiring manager has given me so far: [PASTE THE RAW NOTE, SLACK THREAD, OR EMAIL] Turn this into a clean intake brief with these sections: 1. Mission of the role in two sentences (what this person owns and why it exists now) 2. Top 5 outcomes expected in the first 12 months, written as measurable results 3. Must-have qualifications vs. nice-to-have, clearly split (push back on anything that looks like a wish list rather than a true requirement) 4. Likely current titles and companies where this person works today 5. Compensation and leveling questions I still need answered 6. 8 sharp questions to ask the hiring manager in our intake call to close the gaps above Flag any requirement that will shrink the talent pool unnecessarily and suggest a more inclusive alternative. Keep it tight and skimmable.
Write a job description for [ROLE TITLE] at [COMPANY], a [ONE-LINE COMPANY DESCRIPTION]. Use this intake brief as the source of truth: [PASTE INTAKE BRIEF OR SCORECARD] Structure: a 3-sentence hook about the role and team, What you will own (5-6 outcome-based bullets, not task lists), What we are looking for (split must-have vs. nice-to-have), and How we work / what we offer. Rules: - Write at a 9th-grade reading level. Cut jargon and internal acronyms. - Remove gendered or exclusionary language and any requirement not tied to a real outcome. - Do not invent benefits, salary, or facts not in my brief. Mark anything you are unsure of as [CONFIRM]. - Include a short, specific equal-opportunity line, not boilerplate. Then give me a separate 5-item checklist of claims in the draft I should verify with the hiring manager before posting.
Help me calibrate level and title for this role. Here is the scorecard and the comp band we have approved: Scorecard: [PASTE] Proposed title: [TITLE] Proposed level: [LEVEL, e.g. IC4 / Senior] Approved band: [RANGE AND LOCATION] Do three things: 1. Tell me whether the title, level, and scope are internally consistent. If a candidate at this band reads this scorecard, will the responsibilities feel above, at, or below level? Explain the mismatch. 2. Suggest 3 alternative titles that candidates actually search for, ranked by likely search volume and clarity. 3. List the specific scope or ownership signals I should confirm in intake to defend this level to both candidates and finance. Be direct about where we are likely to lose candidates on title or comp.
Act as a senior sourcer. I am filling [ROLE TITLE] based in [LOCATION / REMOTE], targeting people who can deliver these outcomes: [PASTE TOP OUTCOMES AND MUST-HAVES] Give me a sourcing plan: 1. 10-15 current job titles this person likely holds today, including adjacent and slightly junior titles for stretch candidates 2. Three tiers of target companies: direct competitors, talent feeders, and underrated sources most recruiters overlook (explain why each tier fits) 3. Two boolean strings ready to paste into LinkedIn Recruiter: one tight for exact-match, one broad for discovery 4. 4 signals that someone is likely open to moving (recent reorg, title stagnation, etc.) and how to spot them 5. Two diverse-slate sourcing angles (communities, programs, or searches) to widen the pool beyond the obvious pull Keep boolean strings clean and copy-ready.
Write a short cold outreach message to a passive candidate for [ROLE TITLE] at [COMPANY]. Candidate context (from their profile): [PASTE TITLE, COMPANY, A SPECIFIC PROJECT OR DETAIL, ANYTHING NOTABLE] Why this role is genuinely interesting: [1-2 REAL HOOKS, e.g. scope, mission, growth, team] Channel: [LINKEDIN INMAIL / EMAIL] Rules: - Under 110 words. Lead with one specific, true thing about them, not flattery. - One clear value angle for why this could beat their current seat. - No buzzwords, no "rockstar / ninja," no fake urgency, no em dashes. - End with a low-friction ask (a 15-minute call, not "apply now"). - Sound like a real human who read their profile. Give me the message plus two subject lines or opening lines I can A/B test.
I sent this first message to a passive candidate and got no reply: [PASTE FIRST MESSAGE] Write a 3-touch follow-up sequence spaced over [e.g. 10 business days]. Requirements: - Each touch adds something new: a different angle on the role, a relevant proof point about the team or product, or a genuinely useful resource. Never just "bumping this." - Vary length and tone so the thread feels human, not automated. - Touch 3 is a respectful close-the-loop message that leaves the door open without guilt-tripping. - All under 90 words each, no em dashes, no false scarcity. Label each touch with its timing and the strategic purpose of that message.
You are screening candidates against a defined scorecard. Do not reward keyword stuffing and do not penalize non-traditional paths that still meet the bar. Scorecard must-haves: [PASTE] Nice-to-haves: [PASTE] For each resume I paste below, return a row with: Candidate name or ID, Match on each must-have (Met / Partial / Not shown), 2-3 specific evidence snippets from their background, an overall recommendation (Advance / Hold / Pass), and the single biggest open question to resolve on a screen call. Rules: - Judge only on must-haves and nice-to-haves. Ignore school prestige, employment gaps, and name signals. - If a requirement is simply not stated, mark it "Not shown," do not assume. - Be consistent across candidates so I can compare rows directly. Resumes: [PASTE RESUMES, SEPARATED BY ---]
Build a structured interview kit for [ROLE TITLE] based on these competencies and outcomes:
[PASTE SCORECARD COMPETENCIES]
Produce:
1. An interview loop plan: assign each competency to a specific stage or interviewer so we are not all testing the same thing
2. For each competency, 2 behavioral questions ("Tell me about a time...") and 1 situational question, each with the trait we are actually probing
3. A 4-point rating rubric per competency with concrete "looks like" descriptions for a 1 vs. a 4, so scores mean the same thing across interviewers
4. 3 follow-up probes interviewers can use to push past rehearsed answers
5. A short note on questions to avoid for legal and bias reasons
Keep it usable on one page per interviewer. Convert these raw interview notes into a structured scorecard write-up. Do not inflate or invent anything beyond what the notes support. Role: [ROLE TITLE] Competencies being assessed: [LIST] Raw notes: [PASTE] Return: 1. A rating (1-4) for each competency, each backed by a direct quote or specific behavior from the notes 2. Strongest signal and biggest concern, one line each 3. Any competency the notes did not actually cover (flag as "not assessed," do not guess a score) 4. A clear overall recommendation: Strong Hire / Hire / No Hire / Strong No Hire, with the one-sentence reason 5. 2 targeted questions a later interviewer should dig into If the notes show bias or rely on "culture fit" language, flag it and rewrite that point around an actual competency.
Write a rejection email to a candidate who reached [STAGE, e.g. final round] for [ROLE TITLE] at [COMPANY]. Context I can share: [WHAT WENT WELL, AND THE HONEST-BUT-KIND REASON, e.g. another candidate had deeper X] Future intent: [WOULD WE WANT THEM BACK FOR OTHER ROLES? YES/NO] Rules: - Warm, human, and specific to them. No copy-paste feel, no em dashes. - Give one genuine, usable piece of positive signal so the message has substance. - Be honest without creating legal exposure or critiquing protected characteristics. Keep feedback role-related. - If we want them back, make a real soft invitation to stay in touch. If not, close cleanly and graciously. - Under 150 words. Also give me a 2-line version for candidates I am rejecting earlier in the funnel.
Help me prep to deliver a verbal offer for [ROLE TITLE] to [CANDIDATE]. Offer details: [BASE, EQUITY, BONUS, START DATE, LEVEL, LOCATION/REMOTE] What the candidate cares about most (from our calls): [e.g. growth path, comp, manager, flexibility] Known competing situation: [OTHER OFFERS / CURRENT EMPLOYER COUNTER / NONE KNOWN] Give me: 1. A tight verbal offer script that leads with enthusiasm and frames the package against what they care about 2. The 4 most likely objections (comp, title, start date, counteroffer) with a confident, honest response to each, including where I should and should not negotiate 3. 3 closing questions that surface hesitation early 4. The exact next steps and timeline to state so we control momentum Keep my responses sincere, never pushy or manipulative.
Turn this pipeline data into a weekly update for the hiring manager of [ROLE TITLE]. Be honest about risk. Data (stage counts, days open, recent activity): [PASTE FROM ATS OR SHEET] Target close date: [DATE] Known blockers: [e.g. slow feedback, comp band, narrow scorecard] Write: 1. A 2-sentence headline: are we on track, at risk, or off track, and why 2. Funnel snapshot with the one number that matters most this week 3. The top blocker and the specific decision or action I need from the hiring manager to unblock it 4. What I am doing next, with dates Keep it to what a busy manager will read in 60 seconds. Lead with the ask, not the activity.
Analyze this funnel for [ROLE TITLE], open [NUMBER] days, and tell me where it is breaking. Be specific and quantitative. Funnel data (sourced, contacted, replied, screened, onsite, offer, accept): [PASTE COUNTS] Benchmarks or prior similar roles, if I have them: [PASTE OR WRITE "NONE"] Return: 1. Conversion rate at each stage and the single worst drop-off, with the likely root cause (top-of-funnel volume, message reply rate, screen-to-onsite quality, or close rate) 2. Whether this is a sourcing problem, a calibration problem, a process-speed problem, or a selling problem, and how you can tell from the numbers 3. The 3 highest-leverage actions to take this week, ranked by expected impact 4. A one-paragraph summary I can paste into a leadership update that states the diagnosis and the plan Do not sugarcoat. If the scorecard is likely too narrow, say so.
Drop these into a Claude Project loaded with your team's context: your processes, your templates, your past work, and the standards you hold. With those inputs, the prompts above produce outputs far better than running them in a blank Claude chat.
See Claude for Recruiting for the full picture, or have Treetop build the Recruiting Project for your team.