Templates to make your own

Help me reply to the email below. I want to [accept / decline / suggest another date / ask for more details].
Keep the reply polite, under [100] words, in a [friendly / formal] tone.
Do not invent facts that are not in the email. If I need to add something, mark it as [TO ADD].

Email:
---
[paste the email here]

Check: Feel free to delete the sender's personal details (phone, address) from the pasted email – Grok does not need them to draft a reply.

Summarise the text below in no more than 5 points. Then list separately:
- deadlines and dates,
- what anyone expects me to do,
- questions that remain unclear.
If any of these is not in the text, write “not stated”.

Text:
---
[paste the text here]

Check: Always check dates and amounts against the original – they can shift in a summary.

Write a factual request to [whom – e.g. the local council, the building manager].
Situation: [what happened, when, what you have already done].
I am asking for: [exactly what you want].
Use a polite formal style and this structure: greeting, description of the situation, request, deadline for a reply, closing.
If you refer to a law or regulation, give its exact name and note that I should check it. Do not invent section numbers.

Check: Check any legal references in your country's official legislation database. Grok may cite outdated or foreign rules.

Suggest a meal plan for [5] weekdays for [number] people.
Constraints: [vegetarian / lactose-free / allergies], at most [30] minutes of preparation, I already have [ingredients].
Output:
1. a table of day – meal – preparation time,
2. a shopping list grouped by supermarket section.
Do not include prices.

Check: With allergies, always read the product labels. Grok does not know the ingredients of specific products.

Act as an editor for this text. Do not praise it and do not criticise it for the sake of it.
1. First say what the text promises the reader.
2. Then list specific problems: vague words, repetition, jumps in the argument, sentences that say nothing. Quote a fragment for each one.
3. Then edit the text. Keep my meaning and my style, cut the decoration. Do not invent anything new.
4. Finally, say what you changed and what you deliberately left.

Text:
---
[paste the text here]

Rewrite the text below to make it [more polite / shorter / more formal / friendlier].
Keep all facts and requests. Do not add anything.
Give me two versions: one lightly edited and one more substantially rewritten.

Text:
---
[paste the text here]

Write a post about [idea] for [X / LinkedIn / Facebook].
One idea, not three. No clichés like “in today's fast-paced world”, no emoji or hashtags unless I ask for them.
Use only these facts: [date, place, price, link]. Do not make anything up.
Give me three lengths: up to 280 characters, up to 600 characters, and a version I can say out loud in 20 seconds.

I want a text about [topic] for [reader]. Final length about [number of words].
Purpose: [what the reader should do or understand afterwards].
Do not write the text yet. Write only an outline: headings, one sentence under each on what it will contain, and at the end what the text will deliberately leave out.
Wait until I approve or correct the outline. Write the text only in the next step and only according to the approved outline.

Here is my plan. Your job is not to improve it but to find why it could fail.
Plan:
[plan]
Give me the five most serious objections, ordered from the one that could cost me the most.
For each, say what evidence would refute it and what would confirm it.
Only below that, add one paragraph on how to adjust the plan.

Write an email to [recipient]. I need [goal]. Context: [facts]. Ask for [specific next step] by [deadline]. Tone: [tone]. Maximum [number] words. Provide subject and body. Do not add unsupported promises.

Correct the grammar, spelling and punctuation in the text below.
Do not change the style, word order or content unless necessary.
First return the corrected text. Then list every change in a table: original – corrected – short reason.

Text:
---
[paste the text here]

Check: For borderline cases (commas, capitals), check a reliable style guide or dictionary.

Translate the text below into [target language]. Not word for word, but the way a native writer would write it.
Register: [formal / collegial]. Do not change facts, numbers, names or commitments.
Translate idioms by meaning, not word by word.
If a sentence in the original is unclear or wrong, do not quietly fix it – flag it below the translation.

Text:
---
[paste the text here]

Check: Contracts and official documents may require a certified translation, which Grok cannot replace.

Answer in [language], using [British / American] spelling.
Be direct: the first sentence is the answer, not an introduction or a restatement of my question.
If my question is unclear and the result depends on it, ask at most three questions. Otherwise, get on with it.
Check facts about current events with a search. Mark anything you have not verified. Do not invent sources, quotes or figures.
When editing my texts, keep my meaning. Do not add decoration or emoji.

Look into: [question]. I need the current state, not a textbook explanation. Focus on [your country / the EU].
Search the web and give a source with a link and date for every substantial claim.
Structure:
1. The answer in five sentences.
2. What several reputable sources agree on.
3. Where sources disagree and why (method, the author's interests, older data).
4. What only one side claims so far.
5. What I should open myself if a decision depends on it.
Do not invent quotes. If you found nothing reliable, say so.

Check: Open the links. A working link does not mean the source actually supports the claim.

Check this claim: “[claim]”.
1. Find the original source of the claim, if there is one.
2. List sources that support it and sources that contradict it, with links and dates.
3. Assess whether the claim is true, false, misleading or unverifiable – and why.
Treat social media posts as leads to a source, not as evidence.

Summarise what is being said about [topic] on X over the last [7] days.
- Find three original claims: who made them first and when, with links.
- For disputed facts, link an official source or news outlet if one exists.
- Separate what is verified, what is opinion and what is just mood.
- Distinguish official accounts (institutions, companies) from the rest.
Do not boil it down to one truth. If the sample of posts is small, say so.

Check: The selection of posts may not be representative. It is not an opinion poll.

Compare the two attached texts on [topic].
- Where do they agree?
- Where do they differ (facts, figures, interpretation)? Quote both passages briefly for each difference.
- Which differences can be checked, and how?
Do not pick a winner unless the texts clearly support it.

Research [question] for [country] as of [date]. Prefer primary sources. For each important claim, give a direct link, date and scope. Separate facts, opinions and uncertainty. If you lack web access, do not imply current verification.

Explain [topic] twice.
1. First in eight sentences, as you would to a bright seventeen-year-old. No stories and no “imagine that…” comparisons.
2. Then more precisely: the terms people mix up, one concrete example with numbers, and one thing people often get wrong about the topic.
Finish with three questions that let me check I understood. Put the answers below them.

Quiz me on the attached notes about [topic].
Ask one question at a time and wait for my answer. Then tell me what was right and what was missing, and ask the next question.
Mix easy and harder questions. Only ask about what is in the notes.
After 10 questions, summarise what I should revise.

Suggest a 14-day plan for learning [topic] well enough to [specific goal – e.g. pass an exam / read someone else's code].
I have [number] minutes a day. What I know now: [what you know].
For each day: one task, one output I can show, and one sentence that tells me the day went well.
No motivational phrases. At most two resources for the whole plan – explain why those two and link them.
Days 7 and 14 are for revision only.

Let's practise [language] at [A2 / B1 / B2] level. Topic: [e.g. ordering in a restaurant].
You play [role], I play [role]. Use simple sentences that suit my level.
After each of my replies, first continue the conversation. At the end, list my mistakes and the correct forms in English.

I want to learn [topic] over [period]. I have [time] each day and know [basics]. Suggest a realistic plan with short exercises. Add a weekly way to check progress. Ask first about missing information that significantly changes the difficulty.

Prepare a decision memo on the question: [question].
Context: [who decides, by when, what is at stake].
Options I am seriously considering: [A, B, possibly C].
Structure:
- a recommendation in three sentences,
- the criteria the decision should rest on,
- a table of option × criterion with written assessments (no scores),
- what would have to be true for another option to win,
- what we do not know and how to find out by [deadline].
Do not invent figures. If you need one, ask me.

Compare the attached offers. The criteria I care about, in this order: [criteria].
Compare only what is in the documents. Do not look up the companies unless I ask. Mark missing information as “not stated”.
Output: a table, then which offer comes out best on my criteria and which would win if I swapped the first two.
Finish with questions for the suppliers wherever an offer is missing information.

Check: Grok is not a financial adviser. Treat the result as an aid to thinking, not a decision.

I have a meeting tomorrow. Goal: [goal]. Attendees: [roles].
My notes:
[notes]
Prepare:
1. the goal in one sentence I can say at the start,
2. an agenda for [number] minutes with timings,
3. three questions that must be asked, or the meeting decides nothing,
4. what must be written down at the end: the decision, who owns it, the deadline,
5. a polite sentence to bring the discussion back on topic.
Do not invent anything about people who are not in my notes.

Turn the notes below into minutes for the meeting [name, date].
Structure: attendees – topics discussed – decisions – actions (who, what, by when) – open questions.
If an action has no owner or deadline, write “not assigned”.

Notes:
---
[paste the notes or transcript here]

Check: If you upload a recording transcript, the participants should know about it.

Read the attached contract as a first read for a layperson. You are not my lawyer and do not replace one.
Do not label anything “valid” or “invalid”. The contract is in [language]; I need the output in [language].
List:
1. who gives what and who gets what,
2. money, deadlines, notice periods, penalties, automatic renewal,
3. places where the text gives one party a free hand,
4. what is missing although similar contracts usually include it – mark it as “not in the text”.
For each point, quote the passage briefly and give the clause number. If you are unsure, say what I should ask a lawyer.

Check: Only upload contracts containing personal data if you are allowed to. For large amounts or long-term commitments, consult a professional.

Goal: prepare an overview of [topic] from public sources.
Sources: use only [official websites / specific sites]; give a link for every figure and the date you saw it.
Limits: do not send, buy or delete anything, and do not sign in to any account.
Output: a table with the columns [columns] and a summary of at most [5] sentences in [language].
Check: before you hand it over, tell me which figures you could not verify and why.

Check: Prompt wording does not replace technical permissions. Review the Bot’s access and configure approvals for consequential actions.

Create a routine that you will own.
When: [every Monday at 8:00] (time zone [your time zone]).
Input: [source – folder, spreadsheet, website].
Steps: [exactly what to do, or the name of a saved skill].
Result: [format] in [language].
Boundary: do not send or change anything, only prepare a draft for approval.
If the source is missing or older than [a week], tell me and stop.
Before turning the routine on, do a test run on this safe input: [input].

Check: A test run performs real actions. Use a safe input and check permissions and approvals before running it.

Summarise the attached document for [who] in [5–7] points.
Give the page or section each point is based on.
List deadlines, amounts, obligations and risks separately.
Use only the document. If something is unclear, say so.

Check: Only upload confidential documents if you are allowed to. See the Privacy chapter.

Analyse the attached spreadsheet. Do not assume what the columns mean until it is clear from the header and a few rows.
Steps:
1. What the spreadsheet contains: what one row represents, the period, what is missing.
2. Five findings with concrete figures from the table. Show intermediate steps for calculations.
3. Two things that look interesting but may just be errors in the data.
4. What I should ask the person who exported the data.
Do not infer causes that are not in the data.

Check: Recalculate the key figures in your spreadsheet software.

The table contains [column meanings and units]. Check missing values, duplicates and unusual entries. Describe your checks first. Then report findings with row numbers or unique identifiers. Do not change data without explaining why. Reference: [value and source]. Compare your calculated total against it.

Create an image.
Main subject: [who or what – not a real, named person].
Setting: [where].
Light: [what kind and from where, time of day].
Composition: [close-up / wide, what is on the left, what stays empty], format [landscape / portrait / square].
Style: [photograph / watercolour / flat illustration].
Text in the image: [none / exactly these words: “…”].
Leave out: logos, watermarks, extra people.

Check: If the result misses, change only one part of the description at a time.

Edit the attached photo: [what to change – e.g. remove the car in the background].
Keep everything else unchanged, especially [faces / colours / the text on the sign].

Check: Only edit and publish photos of other people with their consent. Label edited images when you publish them.

Create a short video, one continuous shot.
Action: [what should happen – one action].
In shot: [who or what].
Place and light: [specific].
Camera: [static / slow push-in / slow pan].
Not in shot: text, logos, extra people, cuts.

Check: In a short video, one action and one camera move tend to be more reliable than several things at once. It is not a rule – if the result misses, simplify the action.

Animate the attached image: [what should move – e.g. leaves in the wind, steam from a mug].
Camera: [static / slow push-in]. Mood: [calm / festive].
Keep the main subject's appearance unchanged.

Check: Only animate photos of real people with their consent.

Explain what this [language] code does. First the whole thing in one sentence, then part by part.
Point out places that could cause bugs or security problems.
Do not change the code, just explain it.

```
[paste the code here]
```

Check: Never paste passwords, API keys or credentials. Replace them with placeholders.

Find the cause of the bug. Do not suggest three random fixes.
What should happen: [expected].
What happens: [actual behaviour and error message].
Environment: [language, version, libraries, where it runs].
Code:
```
[relevant part of the code]
```
First give the most likely cause and how I can confirm it with one experiment. Only then suggest the smallest possible fix.
If the cause cannot be in what I gave you, say what information you are missing.

Review this code change (diff). I only care about correctness, edge cases, security and whether the change does what its description says.
Only mention formatting if it hides a bug.
For each finding, give the severity (bug / consider / minor), the reason and the smallest possible change.
If the change is fine, say so in one sentence.

```
[paste the diff here]
```

Write [an SQL query / a spreadsheet formula] that answers: [question].
Tables and columns I actually have: [list].
Do not use columns I have not listed. If the question needs data that is not in the structure, stop and say which.
The result should be [a single number / a list / a daily summary].
Below the query, explain how to check it on a small sample and what result would be suspicious.

Write a [language] script that [what it should do].
Input: [description]. Output: [description].
Requirements: no external libraries unless necessary; comments in English; handle invalid input.
Add a short test or example run and explain how to try the script safely on a copy of my data.

Check: Run any script that deletes or overwrites files on a copy first.