This is what Claude actually produces.

The buyer's problem.

I'm prepping a brief for a Substack-shaped content piece on "claude prompts for marketing teams." Want to outrank the top 10 with something specific. Not interested in writing a 3,500-word generic guide.

Before running the prompt, I grab the visible body content of each top-10 result (the actual sections, not just titles) and paste them in. The prompt's whole value is grounding the brief in real SERP content, not in generic SEO heuristics.

Target query: "claude prompts for marketing teams"

Top 10 results (excerpts):
1. anthropic.com/news/claude-for-business, definition + 2 example prompts
2. hubspot.com/marketing/claude-hacks, 12 prompt templates (gated PDF)
3. promptbase.com/marketplace/marketing, 40 paid prompts, no examples
4. towardsdatascience.com/claude-marketing-guide, academic, no specifics
5. zapier.com/blog/claude-marketing-prompts, listicle, 8 prompts, no outputs
6. sproutsocial.com/insights/claude-for-social, social-only, surface-level
7. notion.so/templates/claude-marketing, generic template gallery
8. learnprompting.org/docs/marketing, beginner tutorial, no marketing depth
9. reddit.com/r/marketing/claude-prompts, thread of 30 comments, no structure
10. linkedin.com/pulse/claude-marketing-thoughtleader-post, opinion piece, no prompts

Site context: Marketing Prompt Hub. We sell a paid prompt library for marketers using Claude.
Already covering: generic intros, beginner tutorials.

This is new content (not a refresh).

The prompt itself.

This is the SERP-Informed Brief Writer prompt, one of the 4 free ones. Same prompt as the standalone /free/serp-informed-brief page. Paste it into Claude with the input above and run.

Target query: {{QUERY}}. I'll paste the top results as {{SERP_CONTENT}}.

Analyze:
- Dominant intent and sub-intents present
- Consensus structure (sections most results share)
- Content gaps no one covers well
- Expertise signals we'd need to match
- Format conventions (tables, calculators, images)

Then write a brief that: matches table stakes, beats on the identified gaps, and refuses to pad. Include a "what NOT to write" section listing common moves we'll skip.

If the user gives you only the query and asks you to "guess what's ranking," refuse. The whole value is grounding the brief in real SERP content.

Don't recommend "comprehensive" briefs. Comprehensive is the loser's strategy. Beat on something specific.

What Claude actually wrote back.

First-run Claude output. No retries, no edits. This is what hits your screen 30 seconds after you paste.

Dominant intent: Operator-led tactical setup. Sub-intents: (1) "what is a Claude Project," (2) "how do I structure system prompts for marketing teams," (3) "which prompts work best for which marketing tasks."

Consensus structure across top 10 (pattern, not template)

- 9/10 lead with a 1-paragraph definition of Claude / why marketing should care
- 7/10 include a generic "12 prompts to try" listicle
- 5/10 include screenshots or example outputs
- 3/10 specify which Claude tier (Free / Pro / API) the prompts assume
- 0/10 include a structured intake (brand voice, positioning, ICP) the prompts should reference

Content gaps no one covers well

1. How to structure a Claude Project for a marketing team (everyone shows single-prompt examples; nobody shows the Project-as-team-context pattern)
2. Multi-brand setups (the agency / multi-product use case is invisible across the SERP)
3. How to handle Project context drift over 6+ months (the "stale Project" problem)
4. When NOT to use Claude (every result assumes Claude = always better)

Expertise signals we'd need

- First-person screenshots of an actual marketing-team Claude Project setup
- A named example brand (real or fictional, but consistent and detailed across the piece)
- A linked downloadable system-prompt template
- An honest "here's where Claude was wrong and we caught it" section

Format conventions

- TL;DR boxes at the top (5/10)
- Comparison tables for prompt-by-prompt use cases (3/10)
- Embedded prompt copy-blocks (only 4/10, surprisingly low; pasteable code blocks are table stakes for this audience)

The brief

- Working title: "How to Structure a Claude Project for Marketing Teams (with the Brand Voice Pattern That Compounds)"
- Word count target: 1,800 (long enough to cover the structured-intake gap, short enough to read in a sitting)
- Must include: 4 named system-prompt sections (voice, KPIs, tools, non-goals); a 30-second screen recording of the Project setup; a downloadable system-prompt template; the multi-brand setup pattern; a "when NOT to use Claude" section
- Must beat on: Multi-brand setup (top result doesn't cover it); the system-prompt template (top result has a 2-line generic example, ours has a 40-line structured one); the "when NOT to use Claude" section nobody else has

What NOT to write

- "What is Claude Projects". Anthropic's docs already own this, don't compete
- A history of AI / "AI for marketing" intro, wastes the first 400 words
- Generic prompt examples: the value is brand-specific structure, not generic prompts
- Word count padding ("there are many ways to..."): the brief is the value, not the length
- An overview of why marketing should "embrace AI", punching at the wrong altitude for this audience