AI prompt for writing a grant application

Written for Claude. Compiled as a writing task — producing original prose: articles, essays, stories, letters, and long-form copy.

<role>
You are a senior writer and editor with a decade of experience in this exact form.
</role>

<audience>
This is for an assessor scoring against published criteria. Pitch the level of detail, vocabulary, and assumed background at that reader specifically, not at a general audience.
</audience>

<context>
What we do: {{organisation}}. What we are asking for: {{ask}}. The funder's stated priorities: {{criteria}}. Evidence we have: {{evidence}}.
</context>

<task>
Write a grant application for {{funder}}.
</task>

<constraints>
- Address each published criterion explicitly, in their words.
- Every claim about impact must come from the evidence supplied.
- State what happens if only part of the funding is awarded.
- Be specific about what the money buys, line by line.
- Write in plain, direct prose. Do not restate the prompt, and do not open with a throat-clearing sentence.
- Vary sentence length. Do not begin consecutive sentences with the same word or structure.
- Do not invent facts, statistics, quotations, or attributed opinions.
</constraints>

<output_format>
Respond in Markdown. Use descriptive headings, and keep paragraphs to three sentences or fewer.
</output_format>

<success_criteria>
Before you finish, check the output against every item below and fix anything that fails.

- An assessor could score every criterion without inferring anything.
</success_criteria>

<before_you_start>
If anything above is unclear, or you are missing information you need, ask up to three specific clarifying questions before producing any output. Do not invent facts, names, numbers, sources, or quotations to fill a gap — if you do not know something, say so plainly.
</before_you_start>

Now, write a grant application for {{funder}}.

Open this in the prompt builder to add your own context and see what would improve it most.

What makes writing a grant application hard to prompt for

Applications are scored against published criteria by someone working through a checklist. Writing beautifully about your mission while never explicitly addressing criterion three loses points that no amount of eloquence recovers.

Why this prompt works

Background comes before the instruction

The model reads the situation before it learns what to do with it, which stops the instruction being diluted by everything that follows. The task is then restated as the final line, where models weight it most heavily.

Rules a writing task assumes but nobody writes down

Write in plain, direct prose. Do not restate the prompt, and do not open with a throat-clearing sentence. Vary sentence length. Do not begin consecutive sentences with the same word or structure. These are added automatically because leaving them implicit is the most common reason this kind of output disappoints.

Success criteria the model checks itself against

Stating how the output will be judged gives the model something concrete to verify before it finishes. Prompts without criteria produce work that is plausible but incomplete, because nothing defined when it was done.

Permission to ask instead of guess

This brief leaves room for interpretation, so the prompt tells the model to ask before inventing details. That converts a confidently wrong answer into a question you can actually answer.

What to replace

Check the output before you use it

• Map each paragraph to a published criterion. Anything mapping to none is cuttable.
• Verify every impact figure against evidence you can produce if asked.
• Check the budget says what the money buys, not just how much.

The same prompt for other models

Identical content, packaged the way each model reads most reliably.

## Role

You are a senior writer and editor with a decade of experience in this exact form.

## Audience

This is for an assessor scoring against published criteria. Pitch the level of detail, vocabulary, and assumed background at that reader specifically, not at a general audience.

## Context

What we do: {{organisation}}. What we are asking for: {{ask}}. The funder's stated priorities: {{criteria}}. Evidence we have: {{evidence}}.

## Task

Write a grant application for {{funder}}.

## Constraints

- Address each published criterion explicitly, in their words.
- Every claim about impact must come from the evidence supplied.
- State what happens if only part of the funding is awarded.
- Be specific about what the money buys, line by line.
- Write in plain, direct prose. Do not restate the prompt, and do not open with a throat-clearing sentence.
- Vary sentence length. Do not begin consecutive sentences with the same word or structure.
- Do not invent facts, statistics, quotations, or attributed opinions.

## Output format

Respond in Markdown. Use descriptive headings, and keep paragraphs to three sentences or fewer.

## Success criteria

Before you finish, check the output against every item below and fix anything that fails.

- An assessor could score every criterion without inferring anything.

## Before you start

If anything above is unclear, or you are missing information you need, ask up to three specific clarifying questions before producing any output. Do not invent facts, names, numbers, sources, or quotations to fill a gap — if you do not know something, say so plainly.

Now, write a grant application for {{funder}}.

**Task**

Write a grant application for {{funder}}.

**Role**

You are a senior writer and editor with a decade of experience in this exact form.

**Audience**

This is for an assessor scoring against published criteria. Pitch the level of detail, vocabulary, and assumed background at that reader specifically, not at a general audience.

**Context**

What we do: {{organisation}}. What we are asking for: {{ask}}. The funder's stated priorities: {{criteria}}. Evidence we have: {{evidence}}.

**Constraints**

- Address each published criterion explicitly, in their words.
- Every claim about impact must come from the evidence supplied.
- State what happens if only part of the funding is awarded.
- Be specific about what the money buys, line by line.
- Write in plain, direct prose. Do not restate the prompt, and do not open with a throat-clearing sentence.
- Vary sentence length. Do not begin consecutive sentences with the same word or structure.
- Do not invent facts, statistics, quotations, or attributed opinions.

**Output format**

Respond in Markdown. Use descriptive headings, and keep paragraphs to three sentences or fewer.

**Success criteria**

Before you finish, check the output against every item below and fix anything that fails.

- An assessor could score every criterion without inferring anything.

**Before you start**

If anything above is unclear, or you are missing information you need, ask up to three specific clarifying questions before producing any output. Do not invent facts, names, numbers, sources, or quotations to fill a gap — if you do not know something, say so plainly.

Now, write a grant application for {{funder}}.