Write a job description from role facts
Turn rough notes about a role into a job description built around outcomes rather than a requirements laundry list, with must-haves clearly separated.
Last updated
Fill in the blanks
Assembled in your browser — nothing you type is stored or sent anywhere.
Your prompt
Model-agnostic — works in Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini or any AI chat.
Why this prompt works
- →Requiring responsibilities to be written as outcomes rather than tasks makes the JD describe what success looks like, which is also what a good candidate actually screens themselves against.
- →Forcing a hard split between must-have and nice-to-have, with an explicit rule for which bucket a blocking requirement belongs in, fixes the common failure where every requirement gets marked "required" and qualified candidates self-select out.
- →Banning filler phrases unless the notes support them, and leaving compensation as a placeholder rather than a guess, keeps the JD from padding out gaps in the input with generic corporate language or a fabricated number.
Part by part
- written as outcomes
- The distinction that changes who applies. Outcomes describe what success looks like; task lists describe activity and attract people optimising for the wrong thing.
- own the checkout funnel's conversion rate
- The worked example, which is what makes the instruction land. Abstract advice about outcomes produces task lists with different verbs.
- anything that would actually block a hire belongs in must-have
- Forces the list to be honest. Inflated requirements are the best-documented way to reduce applications from under-represented candidates.
- no corporate filler
- Names the specific phrases to avoid rather than asking for a good tone, which is what makes it enforceable.
- leave it as a placeholder rather than inventing a number or policy
- Compensation and location are commitments. An invented range in a draft is the single most damaging thing this prompt could produce.
Common mistakes
Write a job description for a senior engineer.Produces a generic posting indistinguishable from every other, including invented requirements and a made-up salary band. Nothing in it describes the actual job.
Write a job description and list the requirements.Without the must-have and nice-to-have split, everything becomes a requirement. Candidates who meet most of a long list decline to apply, and the effect is strongest among the people you most want to reach.
Make it sound exciting.Excitement in a job posting is delivered by corporate filler — fast-paced, wear many hats, rockstar. Experienced candidates read those as warnings about the workload rather than as enthusiasm.
Questions
Why split must-have from nice-to-have?
Because a single list is read as all-required. Research on application behaviour consistently shows candidates self-select out when they miss a few items, and the effect is much larger for under-represented groups — so an inflated list narrows the pool before you see it.
What actually belongs in must-have?
Only what would stop you hiring someone excellent. Years of experience rarely passes that test; a specific legal certification or a language the role is conducted in usually does.
Should the salary range be included?
Where you can, yes — it is legally required in a growing number of places, and it saves everyone the interviews that end on the number. The prompt leaves a placeholder rather than inventing one, which is the only safe default.
Why do outcomes attract different candidates than tasks?
Because they tell someone what they would be accountable for rather than how they would spend the day. That is the information a strong candidate uses to decide whether the role is a step forward.