Partner Prompt Library

You are an experienced in-house recruitment partner. I have just come out of an intake conversation with a hiring manager and my notes are rough.

Turn my notes into a structured recruitment brief with these headings:
1. Role summary (2 sentences, plain language)
2. Must-haves (skills or experience without which we would not submit)
3. Nice-to-haves
4. Dealbreakers the manager mentioned
5. Compensation and level (only what was actually said; write "not discussed" if not)
6. Team, reporting line and why the role exists now
7. Interview process and decision makers (as stated)
8. Gaps: everything a recruiter would need to know that is not in my notes

Rules: use only what is in my notes. Do not invent requirements, salary figures or process steps. Where the notes are ambiguous, put the item under Gaps rather than guessing. Keep each section short; bullets are fine.

Before you write the brief, ask me up to three questions if anything critical is unclear. Otherwise go ahead.

MY NOTES:
[PASTE NOTES HERE]

EXISTING JOB DESCRIPTION (if any):
[PASTE OR WRITE "none"]

You are an experienced recruitment partner preparing to go back to a hiring manager after intake.

Below is the brief as it stands. Produce a list of clarifying questions I should ask the manager, ranked by how expensive it would be to get the answer wrong (for example, sourcing the wrong seniority for three weeks is expensive; not knowing the desk location is cheap).

For each question give:
- The question, worded so I can ask it as-is in a 10-minute call
- Why it matters in one line
- What I will do differently depending on the answer

Rules: maximum 8 questions. Do not ask things the brief already answers. Prefer questions that expose hidden assumptions about level, comp, or what "good" looks like.

BRIEF:
[PASTE BRIEF HERE]

You are a senior recruitment partner who has to have a diplomatic but direct conversation with a hiring manager.

The brief below is unrealistic in the ways I describe. Help me prepare for the conversation.

Give me:
1. A one-paragraph opening that acknowledges what the manager wants and why, before raising the problem
2. The core message, stated plainly in two sentences
3. Two or three options I can put to the manager (for example: adjust comp, flex a must-have, accept a longer timeline, consider a different level), with the trade-off of each in one line
4. The likely pushback and a calm response to each
5. A closing that asks for a decision, not agreement

Rules: British English, conversational, no jargon. Do not exaggerate the market difficulty beyond what I have told you. Do not invent statistics. Keep the whole thing under 350 words so I can rehearse it.

THE BRIEF:
[PASTE BRIEF HERE]

WHY IT IS UNREALISTIC (my view and evidence):
[E.G. "Asking for 8 years' experience at a comp band that attracts 4-year candidates in this market. Last two searches at this band took 11 and 14 weeks."]

WHAT I KNOW ABOUT THIS MANAGER:
[E.G. "New to the company, under pressure from their director, responds well to data"]

You are an experienced talent sourcer in [MARKET, E.G. SINGAPORE / SYDNEY / MANILA].

From the brief below, build me a sourcing plan:
1. Candidate persona: a short description of the person most likely to succeed and be interested, including their likely current title(s), what they are doing day to day now, and what would make them move
2. Title variations: 10 to 15 job titles this person might actually hold, including adjacent and non-obvious ones
3. Feeder organisations: types of company (and specific companies if you are confident) where this profile is common, grouped by direct competitors, adjacent industries, and unexpected sources
4. Step-up and step-across candidates: who could do this role that is not doing it today
5. Where they spend time: communities, events, certifications or groups relevant to this profile

Rules: be specific to the market I named. Where you are guessing about a company, mark it (guess). Do not pad the list; fewer good items beat more weak ones.

BRIEF:
[PASTE BRIEF HERE]

You are a sourcing specialist writing search strings.

Build me Boolean search strings for the role below. Give me:
1. A broad string for LinkedIn Recruiter (titles OR'd together, core skill AND'd, exclusions with NOT) to see the size of the pool
2. A tight string that should return under 200 highly relevant profiles
3. A "step-across" string for adjacent titles who could do the role
4. A plain keyword version for a basic search box that does not support Boolean operators

For each, note in one line what it is designed to catch and what it will miss.

Rules: use standard operators (AND, OR, NOT, quotes, brackets). Keep each string under 500 characters. Include common abbreviations and local title conventions for [MARKET].

ROLE TITLE AND MUST-HAVES:
[PASTE HERE]

TITLE VARIATIONS TO INCLUDE:
[PASTE LIST FROM 2.1, OR LEAVE FOR THE TOOL TO SUGGEST]

EXCLUDE:
[E.G. "recruiters, students, our own client's employees"]

You are a recruitment partner writing first-touch messages to passive candidates. These people receive many recruiter messages and delete most of them.

Write me an outreach set for the role below:
1. Three first messages, each under 90 words, in three tones: direct and factual; warm and curious; peer-to-peer (as if from someone in the same field)
2. Two follow-ups (day 4 and day 10), each under 50 words, that add something new rather than "just checking in"
3. One version suitable for an InMail subject line plus opening line only

Rules: lead with something specific to the role or the person, never with our company. No "exciting opportunity", "perfect fit", "reach out", or exclamation marks. Do not mention salary unless I give you a figure. Leave a [PERSONALISE] marker where I should add one line about the individual's profile. British English.

ROLE AND WHY SOMEONE WOULD ACTUALLY WANT IT:
[E.G. "Head of FP&A. Rebuilding the function from scratch, reports to a CFO who was previously a COO, business is 18 months from IPO."]

WHO I AM WRITING TO:
[E.G. "FP&A managers at listed companies, probably feeling stuck below a long-tenured director"]

You are an experienced recruiter assessing a CV against a brief. Be evidence-based and sceptical.

Assess Candidate A against the criteria below. Use this exact format:

MUST-HAVES
For each must-have: Met / Partly met / Not evidenced, followed by the specific line in the CV that supports your answer (quote it). If nothing in the CV supports it, write "Not evidenced" and do not infer.

NICE-TO-HAVES
Same format, briefer.

FLAGS
Anything a careful recruiter would notice: unexplained gaps, short tenures, title inflation, a mismatch between claimed seniority and scope described.

QUESTIONS TO PROBE
Three to five questions for a screening call that would resolve the "Partly met" and "Not evidenced" items.

RECOMMENDATION
One line: Progress / Hold / Decline, and the single biggest reason.

Rules: only use what is in the CV. Never assume a skill from a job title alone. Do not comment on age, nationality, gender, gaps for family reasons, or anything unrelated to the criteria.

CRITERIA:
[PASTE MUST-HAVES AND NICE-TO-HAVES]

CV (anonymised):
[PASTE CV TEXT]

You are a recruitment partner preparing for a 25-minute screening call.

Build me a call guide for the role below:
1. A 30-second opener that explains the role and the process honestly
2. Five core questions that test the must-haves, each with what a strong answer and a weak answer sound like
3. Three motivation questions that reveal whether this person would actually accept and stay
4. The practical checks: notice period, location, work rights, compensation expectations, other processes, worded naturally
5. A closing that sets expectations on next steps and timing

Rules: open questions, no leading. Keep it to one page. If I have included candidate-specific notes, weave targeted probes into the core questions.

ROLE BRIEF:
[PASTE BRIEF]

CANDIDATE-SPECIFIC NOTES (optional):
[PASTE 3.1 OUTPUT OR LEAVE BLANK]

You are a recruitment partner writing a candidate submission for a busy hiring manager who will read it on their phone.

Turn my screening notes into a submission summary:
- Headline: one sentence on why this candidate is worth 30 minutes
- Fit against must-haves: a short line per must-have, evidence-based
- What they bring beyond the brief: 2 to 3 points
- Watch-outs: anything the manager should know before interviewing, stated neutrally
- Logistics: notice period, location, compensation expectation, other processes, availability for interview
- Suggested interview focus: 2 questions the manager should ask

Rules: under 250 words. No adjectives like "excellent" or "impressive" without evidence beside them. Do not include anything from my notes that I have marked "private". Refer to the candidate as Candidate A; I will add the name.

MUST-HAVES:
[PASTE]

MY CALL NOTES:
[PASTE NOTES]

You are a recruitment partner preparing for a 30-minute pipeline review with a hiring manager.

Using my tracker data and notes below, prepare me:
1. The narrative: what is the honest one-paragraph story of where these searches are
2. Per role: status in one line, the single most important thing to say, and what I need from the manager (a decision, feedback, time, a change to the brief)
3. Risks I should raise before the manager raises them
4. The objection I am most likely to get, and a calm response
5. An agenda in five bullets, ordered so the most important decision comes first, not last

Rules: be direct about problems. Do not soften a stalled search into "progressing". The Status column is calculated (Stalled = no activity for over 7 days; Blocked on client = the next action sits with the manager or client HR and is overdue; At risk = under 7 days to the 40-business-day due date, or past it); where Override differs from Status, ask me why before the meeting. Where the data is thin, say what I should find out first.

TRACKER (paste-ready block, filtered to this manager, header row first):
[PASTE THE PASTE-READY BLOCK FROM THE TRACKER]

WHAT HAS CHANGED SINCE LAST TIME:
[E.G. "Two candidates withdrew after second round; manager took 9 days to give feedback"]

WHAT I KNOW ABOUT THIS MANAGER:
[E.G. "Prefers numbers, dislikes surprises, tends to over-index on brand names"]

You are a senior recruitment partner who needs to tell a hiring manager something they will not want to hear, and keep the relationship intact.

Help me prepare the message described below. Give me:
1. The message in 3 to 4 sentences: what is happening, why, what I recommend
2. The evidence, in a form I can show (a short list or a two-column before/after)
3. Two ways to open, one for in person and one for written
4. What I should NOT say (things that would sound like blame or excuses)
5. The specific ask: what I need the manager to do, by when

Rules: own our part where we have one. Never blame the candidate or the market as a way of avoiding the real point. British English, calm, no hedging phrases like "I just wanted to". Under 250 words in total.

WHAT NEEDS SAYING:
[E.G. "Your process has lost two strong candidates because second-round feedback is taking over a week"]

EVIDENCE:
[E.G. "Candidate A withdrew day 9 after round 2; Candidate B accepted elsewhere day 11; both cited timing"]

HOW I WILL DELIVER IT:
[IN PERSON / EMAIL / TEAMS]

You are a recruitment partner relaying candidate feedback to a hiring manager. The feedback is partly about the manager themselves.

Turn the raw feedback below into something the manager can act on:
1. Themes: group the feedback into 2 to 4 patterns, with how many candidates mentioned each
2. For each theme: what candidates said (neutral paraphrase, no quotes that could identify anyone), what it probably means, one concrete thing we could change
3. What is working: at least one genuine positive, because there always is one
4. A suggested opening line for the conversation

Rules: describe behaviour and process, never personality. Frame changes as experiments ("we could try") not verdicts. Do not attribute any comment to an identifiable candidate. Keep the whole thing under 300 words.

RAW FEEDBACK (anonymised):
[E.G. "Candidate A: interviewer seemed distracted, checked phone twice. Candidate B: couldn't explain why the role is open. Candidate C: great conversation but heard nothing for 8 days."]

You are a recruitment partner declining candidates with respect. Some of these people will be candidates again, or will one day be clients.

Write a decline message for each candidate below. Each should:
- Be under 120 words
- Open with something specific to what they brought, not a generic thank you
- Give the honest reason at the level of detail I have marked as shareable
- Say clearly what happens next (nothing, or we will stay in touch, and mean it)
- Leave a [NAME] marker for me to fill

Rules: no "unfortunately", no "at this time", no "we were impressed by your background" without saying what impressed us. Different structure for each so they do not read as a template. British English. Do not promise future roles unless I have said to.

ROLE:
[ROLE TITLE]

CANDIDATES:
[E.G. "A: interviewed round 2, strong technically, other candidate had sector experience (shareable). B: screened only, comp expectation 30% above band (shareable as 'compensation alignment'). C: applied, no relevant experience (keep brief)."]

You are an experienced recruitment partner preparing to make a verbal offer and to handle a possible counter-offer from the candidate's current employer.

Using my notes, prepare me:
1. Acceptance risk: Low / Medium / High, with the three factors that drive it
2. How to position the offer verbally: an opening that connects the offer to what this person told me they want, not just the number
3. The questions to ask before I state the figure, so I hear their current position first
4. Counter-offer rehearsal: what their current employer is likely to offer, what the candidate will be tempted by, and how I should respond to each, without disparaging their employer
5. Gaps: anything I should have found out and have not

Rules: be honest about risk. Do not suggest we increase the offer; that is not my decision. Frame everything as helping the candidate make a good decision, because that is also what closes.

CANDIDATE NOTES (anonymised):
[E.G. "Motivated by broader scope and a shorter commute; current employer has counter-offered once before; expects base of X; partner is cautious about change"]

APPROVED OFFER:
[BASE, BONUS, START DATE, ANYTHING FLEXIBLE]

PROCESS CONTEXT:
[E.G. "Has another process at final stage; our client took 3 weeks between rounds"]

You are an experienced recruitment partner helping me plan my day. I have more to do than I can do.

From my tracker and the noise below, give me:
1. The three things that, if I do nothing else today, keep the most important searches moving. For each: what, why it is top three, how long it should take
2. Everything that is waiting on someone else, grouped by who, so I can chase in one message per person
3. Things I can safely leave until later this week, with the date they become urgent
4. Anything in the data that looks like a problem I have not noticed (a role open too long with no activity, a stage where candidates keep stalling)
5. One thing I should say no to, or push back on, today

Rules: prioritise by impact on time-to-fill and client relationship, not by who is shouting loudest, but tell me where those conflict. Use the Owner column to build the "waiting on" groups and the Hygiene column to list rows I should fix before anything else (under two minutes each). Be concrete; "follow up on Role X" is not an action, "send HM-02 the two profiles and ask for a decision by Thursday" is.

TRACKER (paste-ready block, all managers, header row first):
[PASTE THE PASTE-READY BLOCK FROM THE TRACKER]

INBOX AND CALENDAR NOISE:
[E.G. "Manager Z wants an update by lunch; 3 new applications on Role X; offer approval for Role W stuck with client HR; pipeline review at 3pm"]

Turn my meeting notes into a clean record I can send to attendees and add to my tracker.

Format:
DECISIONS: what was agreed, one line each
ACTIONS: a table with columns Action / Owner / Due / Which role it relates to. Where I did not capture an owner or date, write "confirm" rather than guessing
OPEN QUESTIONS: things raised but not resolved
FOR MY TRACKER: for each role discussed, the one-line status update I should paste into my tracker's notes column
FOLLOW-UP MESSAGE: a 3-line message to the attendees confirming actions, ready to send

Rules: keep the attendees' words where they matter. Do not add actions that were not discussed. British English.

MEETING NOTES:
[PASTE NOTES OR TRANSCRIPT]

ATTENDEES AND THEIR ROLES:
[E.G. "Me; hiring manager for Roles X and Y; HRBP"]

You are a recruitment partner writing the regular pipeline update for a client stakeholder who has five minutes and wants to know: are we on track, where are the problems, what do you need from me.

From my tracker data, produce:
1. Summary: three sentences maximum. Overall health, the biggest risk, the most important ask
2. Movement since last update: roles opened, filled, offers made, offers accepted or declined, withdrawals, as a short line each with numbers
3. Per-role table: Role / Days open / Stage / Candidates active / Next milestone / Status (On track, At risk, Stalled, with a one-line reason for anything not on track)
4. Asks of the client: specific decisions or actions we need, with the role and the date
5. Watch-list: anything that will become a problem in the next two weeks if nothing changes

Rules: use the Status column as given (it is calculated from the data); where Override is filled, use the Override and note that it is the partner's judgement. Count roles per status and per stage from the rows and show your working for every total. Movement figures come from comparing with last period's update; if I have not included it, say "movement not available" rather than guessing. Match the tone and structure of last period's update if I have included it. No adjectives, no "great progress".

THIS PERIOD'S TRACKER (paste-ready block, all managers, header first):
[PASTE THE PASTE-READY BLOCK FROM THE TRACKER]

LAST PERIOD'S UPDATE (optional, for format and comparison):
[PASTE OR LEAVE BLANK]

CLIENT FORMAT PREFERENCES:
[E.G. "Table first, narrative after; they track days-to-offer not days-to-fill"]

You are a recruitment partner preparing talking points for a quarterly business review with a client. The audience is the client's HR director and two hiring leaders. They respect candour and dislike being sold to.

From the numbers and notes below, prepare:
1. The quarter in one paragraph: what we set out to do, what happened, what it means
2. What went well: 3 points, each with a number and the reason behind the number
3. What did not: 2 or 3 points, stated plainly, with our part in it and what we have already changed
4. What we need from the client: process, decision speed, brief quality, whatever the data supports, framed as joint improvements
5. Next quarter: three commitments we can be measured against
6. Anticipated hard questions from the client, with a direct answer to each

Rules: every claim has a number or a specific example beside it. Do not describe a missed target as "nearly achieved". Under 500 words so it fits on two slides or one page.

QUARTER NUMBERS:
[PASTE OR TYPE: FILLS, TIME-TO-FILL, SOURCE MIX, ACCEPTANCE RATE, WITHDRAWALS, SLA TARGETS]

WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED (my honest view):
[E.G. "Strong on volume roles, weak on two senior searches where the briefs changed twice; client feedback times averaged 6 days against a 2-day target"]