u/LiteratureLeading123

How prompt work the new Claude

Step 1: Replace “review” with the actual scope.

Before (4.6): Claude would try to understand what you meant, with freedom.

After (4.7): Does exactly what you typed.

Old:

Review this contract.

New:

Review this contract. Flag risks per clause. Rate severity 1-5. 
Suggest one rewrite per risky clause. Return as a table.

The fix: Name every output. Name the order. Name the boundaries.

Step 2: Define length.

Before (4.6): Roughly the same length each time, regardless of input size.

After (4.7): Sizes the answer to what it thinks the task is. Long input + “summarize” = long summary. If you want a short summary, be explicit.

Old:

Summarize this report.

New:

Summarize this report in exactly 5 bullet points. 
Each bullet under 15 words. First word of each bullet: an action verb.

The fix: Name the format and the cap.

Step 3: Use positive instructions only.

Negative instructions stick to the literal sentence on Claude 4.7.

They don’t work. (it’s kinda funny to say “don’t be negative” which is negative).

Old:

Don't use jargon. Don't use buzzwords. Don't sound like a marketer.

New:

Write in plain English a 16-year-old could read aloud.
Use short, concrete words: simple, specific, real.
Replace "leverage" with "use." Replace "scalable" with "works at any size."

Step 4: Use action verbs only.

Each action verb tells Claude 4.7 to ship something specific. And 4.7 loves that.

Old:

Can you help me with the email?

New:

Go to my Gm ail. Find [contact] and read our last conversation.
Write the answer email. Final draft. Send-ready.
Goal: book a meeting with the CRO of Snowflake by Friday.
Length: under 90 words.
Tone: confident, casual, specific.

Step 5: Calling “tools”.

A “tool” is, for example, when Claude goes to the web to find information.

Before (4.6): Called tools frequently.

After (4.7): Calls fewer tools. Reasons more between calls.

The fix:

If quality is good, trust the new default.

If you want more tool use, prompt explicitly. For example:

Use web search aggressively. Verify every claim with at least 2 sources.

Step 6: The new tone.

Before (4.6): Warmer. Validation-forward. “Great question!” energy. More emojis.

After (4.7): More direct. Less validation. Almost zero emojis.

The fix (if you want a warmer tone back):

Use a warm, conversational tone. Acknowledge the user's framing before answering.

Even better: paste 2-3 sentences in the voice you want, and tell Claude to match the rhythm of those examples.

Step 7: Add “go beyond the basics” on creative tasks.

This phrase is from Anthropic’s own Claude 4.7 doc. It pushes 4.7 past the literal minimum on creative or open-ended work. Feels great when you finally try it!

Old:

Build a landing page for my AI consultancy.

New:

Build a landing page for my AI consultancy.
Sections (in this order):
- Hero (headline + subheadline + CTA)
- Logo bar (6 client placeholders)
- 3 case-study cards (problem / what I did / result)
- Service blocks (workshops, deployment, sprints, 
  fractional Chief of AI)
- Testimonial carousel (3 quotes)
- About me (180-word bio + headshot placeholder)
- Newsletter signup
- Footer
Style: editorial, serif headlines, sans-serif body, generous whitespace.
Animations: subtle on scroll. No purple gradients.
Go beyond the basics. Polish like it's a real client deliverable.
reddit.com
u/LiteratureLeading123 — 9 days ago

Just finished reading a massive Claude Cowork workflow guide and honestly it changed how I think about using AI.

The whole Claude Cowork concept is basically turning AI into a real workspace/system instead of just chatting with it.

Main setup was:

  • ABOUT ME folder
  • OUTPUTS folder
  • TEMPLATES folder
  • global instructions
  • anti-AI-writing-style rules
  • reusable templates/workflows
  • keeping context files short/high-signal

One part I liked was the about-me.md workflow.

The prompt starts with:

“You are building my about-me.md file for my Cowork folder.”

Then Claude interviews you with questions like:

  • What does a good week of work look like?
  • What separates great work from average work?
  • What patterns in your industry make you cringe?
  • What are your non-negotiables?

And instructions like:

  • “If I give a vague answer, push back.”
  • “Every sentence should carry signal.”
  • “Extract the patterns from my answers.”

Another useful part was reusable templates:

“Use the template in TEMPLATES/[file-name]”

The anti-AI-writing-style file was interesting too.
The guide talked about banning generic AI words/patterns, removing repetitive phrasing, limiting paragraph length, etc.

Honestly feels closer to building a personal AI operating system than normal prompting.

reddit.com
u/LiteratureLeading123 — 11 days ago