The prompts below are battle-tested across dozens of B2B sales orgs. Copy any one of them into Claude (Pro, Team, or Enterprise: all support Projects). Replace the bracketed variables with your specifics. Then save into a dedicated Claude Project so the system prompt persists across uses. Each prompt is annotated with the workflow it sits inside.
You are an account research analyst for [COMPANY]. We sell [WHAT] to [WHO]. Our value prop is: [VALUE PROP]. Research [TARGET COMPANY] using the URL [URL]. Return a 1-page brief with: - Fit score against our ICP (1-10 with reasoning) - Signals of timing (recent hires, funding, product launches, leadership changes in the last 90 days) - Likely buyer persona and what they probably care about - 3 specific angles for outreach (based on the research, not generic value-prop language) - Anything that suggests this is NOT a fit If a data point is missing, write [Unknown: source needed]. Do not invent facts.
Here is a LinkedIn profile: [PASTE PROFILE TEXT] Summarize: 1. Their current role and how long they've been in it 2. Their career arc: what each transition suggests about their priorities 3. Who they likely report to (based on title and company stage) 4. What I should NOT lead with (anything they've publicly seen 100 times) 5. One non-obvious thing about their background that could open a conversation Be specific. Cite from the profile. Don't invent.
For each company in this list: [PASTE LIST] Check for any of these signals in the last 30 days: - Funding round announced - Senior leadership change (especially in [RELEVANT FUNCTION]) - Product launch or major announcement - Job posting for a role that suggests our use case (e.g., "Director of Revenue Operations") - Press mentioning operational pain (slow growth, churn, restructuring) Return a table: Company | Signal | Date | Why it matters | Suggested action.
You are drafting outreach for [COMPANY]. Voice: direct, specific, no marketing speak. Here's the account brief: [PASTE BRIEF] Here's the buyer profile: [PASTE PROFILE] Draft 3 first-touch email variants. Each: - Maximum 90 words - Opens with something specific to them (not "I noticed your company is growing") - Names one specific problem we solve for companies like theirs - Ends with a low-friction ask (15-min call, not a demo) - Never uses: "circling back", "touching base", "synergies", "leveraging" For each variant, tell me what's different about the angle.
Here's the first email we sent: [PASTE EMAIL] Here's what we know about the prospect: [PASTE BRIEF] Draft a 5-touch follow-up sequence: - Touch 2 (day 3): Brief bump. 30 words. New angle, same ask. - Touch 3 (day 7): Value-add. Share a specific insight or resource, not "circling back." - Touch 4 (day 14): Social proof. One relevant customer story, 60 words. - Touch 5 (day 21): Breakup email. Polite, short, leaves the door open. Each touch should feel like a human wrote it, not a template. Vary the opening line. No "Hope this finds you well."
Draft a LinkedIn message to [PROSPECT NAME] at [COMPANY]. Rules: - 40-50 words maximum - No connection-request framing; assume already connected - Reference something specific from their profile or recent posts - One sentence on relevance to us, one sentence ask - No links in the first message - Tone: respectful, specific, brief
I have a discovery call with [PERSON] at [COMPANY] in 30 minutes. Their account brief: [PASTE BRIEF] What I know about them personally: [PASTE LINKEDIN SUMMARY] What they responded to in our outreach: [PASTE EMAIL THREAD] Prepare: 1. 5 open-ended discovery questions tailored to their context 2. 3 pieces of social proof relevant to their situation 3. 2 likely objections and how I'd respond 4. The strongest single reason to take a next step 5. What I should NOT say (assumptions about their state that could be wrong) Keep total under 400 words. I'll read this in 5 minutes.
Here's the transcript of my discovery call: [PASTE TRANSCRIPT] Extract: 1. The 3-5 things they care about most (in their language, not mine) 2. Their stated pain points 3. Their current solution and what's wrong with it 4. The decision process they described (who's involved, timeline) 5. Any specific commitments made (mine or theirs) Then draft a follow-up email: 150 words, opens with their words, references 2 specific things from the call, lists the agreed next step, attaches the 1 thing they asked about.
Here's the deal history: [PASTE NOTES + EMAIL THREAD] Here's what I know about the prospect's organization: [PASTE] Diagnose: 1. What's likely actually happening on their side (3 hypotheses, ranked by likelihood) 2. The most common stall reasons at this stage and how each looks in the data 3. The single email I could send right now that would most reliably get a response, or confirm the deal is dead 4. The signals that would tell me the deal is unrecoverable Be honest. If it's likely dead, say so.
Draft a proposal for [COMPANY] using our standard structure (in the Project knowledge base). Discovery context: [PASTE DISCOVERY NOTES] Their stated requirements: [PASTE REQUIREMENTS] Our agreed scope: [PASTE] Pricing: [PASTE] Match the voice and structure of the example proposals in the knowledge base. Cite specifics from the discovery. If a detail is missing, write [TK: ask team about X]. Do not guess. Do not write the executive summary yet. That is a separate pass.
Build me an objection response library for [PRODUCT] selling into [PERSONA]. For each of these objections, give me: - The real fear behind the objection (often different from the surface objection) - A 2-3 sentence response that addresses the real fear, not the surface - One question that surfaces whether the objection is real or a polite no Objections to cover: 1. "We don't have budget right now" 2. "We're already using [COMPETITOR]" 3. "Send me some information" 4. "Let me think about it" 5. "We need to wait until [Q3/next year/after fundraise]" 6. "It's not the right time" Format: table.
Here's my current pipeline: [PASTE DEAL LIST WITH STAGES, AMOUNTS, LAST-TOUCH DATES] Give me: 1. Top 3 deals to focus on this week and why 2. Deals that need to be marked closed-lost (no activity in 30+ days at stage X) 3. The single highest-leverage action I could take this week 4. Coverage gap: am I going to hit quota? If not, by how much? Be direct. I don't need encouragement. I need clarity.
These three prompts address scenarios that come up less often but are high-stakes when they do: competitive displacement, multi-threaded buying committees, and inbound lead qualification. Each is designed to run inside a Claude Project that already holds your positioning context.
We are trying to displace [COMPETITOR] at [TARGET COMPANY]. What we know about their current setup: [PASTE ANY INTEL] Our differentiation vs. [COMPETITOR]: [PASTE FROM KNOWLEDGE BASE] The buyer's stated priorities from discovery: [PASTE] Give me: 1. The 2-3 displacement angles most likely to resonate given their priorities (not our generic positioning) 2. The landmines I should avoid (things [COMPETITOR] does well that I should not attack) 3. A 3-email sequence written from the angle of "you deserve to see what else exists" (not "we are better") 4. The single question that would surface whether they are actually open to switching Do not write generic competitive comparisons. Use their specific context.
I am working a deal at [COMPANY] with multiple stakeholders. Here is what I know about each person: - [NAME 1], [TITLE]: [WHAT I KNOW] - [NAME 2], [TITLE]: [WHAT I KNOW] - [NAME 3], [TITLE]: [WHAT I KNOW] For each stakeholder, give me: 1. Their likely role in the decision (economic buyer, technical evaluator, end user, blocker, champion) 2. What they care about most (based on title and what I've shared) 3. The message that would resonate with them specifically 4. Whether I am currently over-indexed or under-indexed on them Then give me: the single biggest coverage gap and what to do about it this week.
A new inbound lead just submitted our form. Here is what they shared: [PASTE FORM SUBMISSION] Also available: their company website [URL] and LinkedIn profile [PASTE OR URL]. Do the following: 1. Score this lead against our ICP (1-10). Explain the score. 2. Identify the most likely pain driving their inquiry (infer from their role + company context) 3. Flag any disqualifying signals (wrong company size, wrong industry, no budget signals) 4. Draft the first-response email: 120 words, references something specific from their submission, names the most relevant outcome we deliver for companies like theirs, proposes a specific 20-min call time 5. Suggest 2 discovery questions to ask on that call Speed matters here. Response should go out within 5 minutes of form submission.
A prompt dropped into a blank Claude chat is a one-time use. The same prompt inside a well-configured Claude Project is a compounding asset. Here is what separates reps who get inconsistent output from those who get reliable results every time.
Paste your ideal customer profile, firmographic criteria, and top three pain points into the Claude Project system prompt. Every prompt on this page becomes more accurate immediately because Claude already knows who you sell to.
Create a short text file listing every phrase your team is not allowed to use in outreach: "circling back", "hope this finds you well", "synergies", "leverage", "game-changer". Upload it to Project knowledge. Claude will avoid them without being reminded every time.
Write up two or three anonymized customer wins in 100 words each. Include the customer's situation before, what they did with your product, and the specific outcome. Upload these to the Project. Now every prompt that asks for social proof pulls from real material, not invented examples.
Prompt 01 (account brief) feeds Prompt 04 (first-touch email), which feeds Prompt 05 (follow-up sequence). When you run these in the same Project conversation, Claude carries context from each step. The output from each prompt improves because it builds on what came before.
After Claude drafts an email, follow up with: "What is the weakest sentence in this email and why?" Then: "Rewrite only that sentence." This two-step pattern tends to produce sharper output than a single-pass prompt and trains you to think more critically about what strong outreach looks like.
Claude Team and Enterprise plans let you share Projects across the team. One well-configured Project with your ICP, voice guidelines, battlecards, and case studies means every rep starts from the same foundation. Inconsistent output across reps is almost always a Project configuration problem, not a prompt problem.
These prompts are 10x more powerful inside a properly configured Claude Project than copy-pasted into a fresh chat each time. The Project gives Claude persistent context: your ICP, your voice, your company's positioning, your past sales wins.
For the full setup walkthrough, see our guide to building a Claude Project for your team. Or if you want this built for you across all of GTM, our Implementation engagement includes building Sales, Marketing, and RevOps Claude Projects with your specific configurations.
The $1,500 AI Audit produces a written Claude deployment plan for your team in 5 business days. Project setup, system prompts, brand voice, and the workflows to ship first.