Why "act like an expert" fails
"Act like a marketing expert" asks Claude to adopt a persona. It doesn't hand over anything true about your business, your numbers, your customers, or your content. With nothing specific to work from, Claude fills the gap with the most generic version of marketing advice that fits the sentence. That's why the output always reads like it could apply to any business.
Each prompt below is built the opposite way. It only produces a useful answer once you've filled in something real. No persona, no roleplay, just your actual inputs.
How to use this page: Copy a prompt, replace everything in brackets with your real details, paste it into Claude. Skipping a bracket or leaving it vague is the one thing that breaks all five.
The Competitor Pain Point Prompt
Finds the exact pain point a competitor leans on that you've never mentioned, in their words, not a paraphrase.
Here's what I sell: [one sentence describing your offer]
Here's who buys it: [one sentence describing your buyer]
Here's a competitor or niche leader doing well in this space: [name]
Pull up their last 10 pieces of content you have context on (or ask me
to paste them if you don't). Tell me the single pain point they return
to the most, in their exact words or close to it. Then tell me where
in my own last 5 posts I could have said the same thing and didn't.
Don't summarise their content strategy in general terms. I want the
one pain point, quoted, and the one place I'm silent on it.
The Dead Content Audit Prompt
Finds the exact sentence where a reader would stop reading, not a vague note to "add more value."
Here are my last 5 pieces of content, pasted in full:
[paste post 1]
[paste post 2]
[paste post 3]
[paste post 4]
[paste post 5]
For each one, give me the exact sentence where a stranger would stop
reading and scroll away, and the specific reason: too vague, too slow
to get to the point, no reason to care, or something else you name
directly.
Do not tell me to "add more value," "be more engaging," or "hook
harder." Quote the exact line and name the exact problem with it.
The Objection-to-Offer Prompt
Turns your most common "no" into a proof-backed line for your sales page, DM script, or call close.
Here's the objection I hear most often before someone buys:
[the actual objection, in the words people really use]
Here's a specific, real result I've gotten for a client or myself
that directly answers it:
[the result, with a real number or timeframe, not "great results"]
Write the one sentence that should go on my sales page or in my DM
script to answer this exact objection, using this exact result.
No reassurance language like "don't worry" or "trust the process."
The number does the convincing, not the tone.
The Revenue Leak Finder Prompt
Finds which single step in your funnel is losing the most money, and the one test to run on it this week.
Here's my funnel, step by step:
[e.g. ad -> landing page -> booked call -> close]
Here are my real numbers at each step over the last [30/60/90] days:
[step 1: number], [step 2: number], [step 3: number], [step 4: number]
Tell me which single step is losing me the most money relative to a
reasonable benchmark for that step type, and the one specific test
I should run on that step this week. One test, not a list of five
ideas. Tell me what to measure to know if it worked.
The Proof-First Content Prompt
Writes one piece of content built entirely around a real proof point, instead of general advice with no receipts.
Here's a specific result I got, for a client or for myself:
[the result, with a real number: revenue, time saved, conversion
lift, whatever it is]
Write one piece of content for [platform] built entirely around this
one proof point. The hook has to reference the actual number in the
first line. Do not generalise it into advice anyone could give. If
the post could be true without this specific result, rewrite it.
No result on hand yet? Run the Content Intel System first to find a proof point already sitting in your own numbers, then come back and run this one.