Stop Writing Bad Prompts: How Marketers Actually Use ChatGPT and Claude for Content Briefs

I've reviewed maybe 200 content briefs from marketing teams in the past year. You know what the worst ones have in common? They read exactly like someone asked ChatGPT "write me a content brief" and hit send.

The best ones? They're using AI, sure. But they're using it like a tool, not a magic button.

Here's the thing about prompt engineering for marketers: it's not about learning to code. It's about learning to think clearly about what you actually need. The prompt is just the interface between your fuzzy idea and a useful output. Get specific, get structured, and stop expecting the AI to read your mind.

The Content Brief Problem Nobody Talks About

Most marketing teams have one of two problems with content briefs. Either they're spending 3 hours writing a 6-page brief that nobody reads, or they're sending writers a Slack message that says "can you write something about SEO?" and wondering why the content misses the mark.

AI should fix this. In theory.

In practice, I've seen teams replace their 6-page brief with a 6-page AI output that's equally useless. Because garbage in, garbage out isn't just a catchy phrase—it's the entire game.

The actual skill here isn't getting ChatGPT or Claude to generate text. They're embarrassingly good at that already. The skill is knowing what makes a content brief actually useful, then reverse-engineering your prompt to get that output.

What Actually Goes Into a Useful Content Brief

Before we talk about prompts, let's talk about what you're trying to create. A content brief isn't a creative writing assignment. It's a set of constraints and context that helps a writer (human or AI) produce something that serves a specific purpose.

Here's what matters:

The business objective. Not "increase traffic" (everyone wants that). Something like "rank for 'email marketing automation' to capture leads in the consideration phase" or "create a resource sales can send to prospects asking about our API capabilities."

The audience, specifically. "B2B marketers" is useless. "Marketing managers at SaaS companies with 20-200 employees who are evaluating their first marketing automation platform" gives you something to work with.

The angle or unique value. What makes this piece worth reading instead of the 47 other articles on the same topic? This is where most briefs fall apart. "Comprehensive guide" isn't an angle. "Why most companies implement marketing automation backwards" is an angle.

The structure and key points. Not a rigid outline, but the 3-5 core ideas that need to be in there.

Examples, data, or references. Specific things to include or cite. Real companies, real numbers, real tools.

Tone and constraints. Word count, style, technical level, any brand voice considerations.

You need all of this whether you're briefing a human writer or an AI. The difference is how you communicate it.

The Prompt Structure That Actually Works

Here's what I've found works across both ChatGPT and Claude (they're more similar than different for this use case, though Claude tends to be slightly better at following complex structural requirements).

You want three layers:

Layer 1: Role and context. Tell the AI what perspective to take and what it's helping you accomplish. Not "you are a content writer" (too generic). Something like: "You're an experienced content strategist helping create a brief for a long-form blog post. The writer who will use this brief is skilled but not familiar with our specific audience or business goals."

Layer 2: Specific requirements. This is where you dump all the information from the previous section. Be exhaustingly specific. Include actual URLs of competitor content you want to reference. Name real companies. Give actual target keywords.

Layer 3: Output format. Tell it exactly how to structure the response. Use markdown formatting. Specify sections. If you want bullet points, say so. If you want a table comparing approaches, describe the table.

The mistake most people make is jumping straight to Layer 2 or 3 without Layer 1. The AI needs context about what role it's playing and what success looks like.

A Real Prompt Example (That You Can Actually Steal)

Let's say you need a brief for an article about email segmentation. Here's what a solid prompt looks like:

You're a content strategist at a B2B SaaS company creating a detailed brief for a blog post. Our audience is marketing managers at companies with 50-500 employees who use email marketing but aren't seeing strong results. They're sophisticated enough to know basic tactics but need help with strategic implementation.

Create a comprehensive content brief for an article titled: "Email Segmentation Beyond Demographics: Behavioral Signals That Actually Improve Conversion"

Business objective: Rank for "email segmentation strategies" and "behavioral email marketing" while positioning our platform's advanced segmentation features as a natural solution. This should attract leads in the consideration phase who are evaluating whether to upgrade from basic email tools.

Key requirements:
- Target length: 2,000-2,500 words
- Include 3-4 specific examples of behavioral segmentation tactics with real scenarios
- Reference how companies like Shopify, Notion, or similar SaaS companies approach this (research if needed)
- Address the common objection that behavioral segmentation is "too complex" for mid-sized teams
- Include a section on data requirements and privacy considerations
- Tone: Authoritative but practical, not academic. Like a senior marketer sharing what actually works.

Format the brief with these sections:
1. Article Overview (2-3 sentences on the core argument)
2. Target Audience (detailed description)
3. Key Sections (outline with main points for each section)
4. Required Examples (specific scenarios to include)
5. Data Points to Research (what statistics or studies to find)
6. Internal Linking Opportunities (suggest related topics we might have content on)
7. Call-to-Action Approach (how to naturally mention our product)

See the difference? You're not asking it to write the content. You're asking it to help you think through what the content should accomplish and how to structure it.

The Iteration Game: Why Your First Prompt Won't Be Your Last

Here's what nobody tells you about prompt engineering: it's a conversation, not a command.

Your first prompt will give you maybe 70% of what you need. That's fine. That's expected. The skill is in the follow-up.

Let's say the AI gives you a brief that's too generic. Your next prompt might be: "This is a good start, but the key sections are too broad. For the section on behavioral triggers, give me 5 specific triggers with concrete examples of when you'd use each one. Reference actual email sequences from real companies where possible."

Or maybe it's too focused on theory: "Rewrite the implementation section to be more tactical. Assume the reader has access to a standard ESP like Mailchimp or HubSpot. What are the actual steps they'd take?"

I usually go through 2-3 iterations before I have a brief I'd actually send to a writer. Each iteration is refining, adding specificity, or adjusting the angle.

The people who are best at this aren't the ones who write perfect prompts on the first try. They're the ones who can quickly identify what's missing and course-correct.

Claude vs ChatGPT: Does It Actually Matter?

Honestly? For content briefs, not as much as people think.

Claude (especially Claude 3.5 Sonnet) tends to be better at following complex structural instructions and maintaining consistency across longer outputs. If you're creating a really detailed brief with lots of specific sections and requirements, Claude usually nails it more reliably.

ChatGPT (particularly GPT-4) is sometimes better at creative angles and unexpected connections. If you're trying to find a unique approach to a tired topic, ChatGPT might surprise you more often.

But here's the reality: the quality of your prompt matters way more than which tool you use. A specific, well-structured prompt in ChatGPT will beat a vague prompt in Claude every time.

I use both. Usually start with whichever one I have open, then might try the same prompt in the other if I'm not getting what I need. They're different enough that sometimes one just clicks better for a particular project.

The Stuff That Trips People Up

A few patterns I see constantly:

Asking for creativity without constraints. "Give me a creative angle on content marketing" is too open-ended. "Give me 5 contrarian angles on content distribution that challenge the conventional wisdom about social media" gives the AI something to work with.

Forgetting to specify what you don't want. Sometimes it's easier to tell the AI what to avoid. "Don't include generic advice about 'knowing your audience' or 'creating quality content'—assume the reader already knows the basics."

Not providing enough context about your audience. The AI doesn't know who you're writing for unless you tell it. And "B2B marketers" isn't enough. Get specific about their level of sophistication, their challenges, what they already know.

Treating the AI like a search engine. You're not asking it to find information (though it can). You're asking it to structure your thinking and help you create a useful framework. That's a different kind of task.

Accepting the first output. The best results come from iteration. Push back, ask for alternatives, refine the angle.

Prompt Templates That Save Time

Once you've figured out what works, turn it into a template. Here are three I use constantly:

The Competitive Brief Template:

Analyze these three articles: [URL 1], [URL 2], [URL 3]

Create a brief for an article on the same topic that:
- Identifies gaps in what these articles cover
- Suggests a unique angle we can take
- Outlines key sections with specific points these competitors missed
- Recommends 3-4 examples or data points that would differentiate our content

Target audience: [specific description]
Our unique perspective/expertise: [what we know that they don't]

The Update/Refresh Brief Template:

Here's an existing article: [paste content or URL]

Create a brief for updating this content that:
- Identifies outdated information or examples
- Suggests new sections to add based on current trends
- Recommends specific data points or examples to update
- Proposes ways to expand thin sections
- Maintains the core structure and angle that worked

Context: This article currently ranks for [keywords] and drives [traffic numbers]. We want to improve it without losing existing rankings.

The Topic Cluster Brief Template:

We're creating a topic cluster around [main topic]. The pillar content will cover [brief description].

Create briefs for 5 supporting articles that:
- Each focus on a specific subtopic
- Link naturally back to the pillar content
- Target different stages of the buyer journey
- Avoid overlap while maintaining coherent narrative

For each brief, include:
- Suggested title and target keyword
- Core argument or angle
- 3-4 key sections
- How it connects to the pillar content

Audience: [description]

You'll modify these every time, but having the structure saves you from starting from scratch.

When AI Briefs Actually Make Things Worse

Look, I'm not going to pretend this is always better.

Sometimes the AI gives you a brief that's technically complete but creatively dead. It hits all the requirements but has no personality, no unique angle, no insight that makes you think "oh, that's interesting."

That's usually a sign that your prompt was too focused on structure and not enough on the actual value proposition. Or that you're trying to brief a topic where you don't actually have a unique perspective.

Here's the uncomfortable truth: AI will happily help you create a brief for generic, me-too content. It won't tell you that the world doesn't need another "10 tips for better email marketing" article. That's still your job.

The best use of AI for content briefs is when you already know what you want to say, you just need help organizing it and ensuring you don't miss anything important. If you don't have a point of view yet, AI will just help you create well-structured mediocrity faster.

The Workflow That Actually Works

Here's what I do now:

Step 1: Spend 10-15 minutes thinking about the actual goal. What are we trying to accomplish? Who's this for? What's our unique angle? I write this down in bullet points, messy and incomplete.

Step 2: Feed those bullets into Claude or ChatGPT with a structured prompt asking it to expand them into a full brief. I'm specific about format and what sections I need.

Step 3: Review the output and identify what's missing or generic. Usually there are 2-3 sections that need more specificity or a different angle.

Step 4: Follow-up prompts to refine those sections. "Give me 5 more specific examples for the implementation section" or "Rewrite the intro to be more contrarian—challenge the conventional wisdom."

Step 5: Add my own notes about brand voice, specific things to include or avoid, any internal resources or examples the writer should use.

The whole process takes maybe 20-30 minutes. Compare that to the 2-3 hours I used to spend writing detailed briefs from scratch, or the 5 minutes I'd spend writing a vague brief that led to three rounds of revisions.

The Part Where I Tell You This Isn't Magic

You still need to know what good content looks like. You still need to understand your audience. You still need to have something worth saying.

AI doesn't fix strategic problems. It doesn't give you a unique perspective if you don't have one. It doesn't make bad ideas good.

What it does is help you structure your thinking, ensure you don't miss important elements, and save time on the mechanical parts of creating a brief. That's valuable. That's worth learning.

But if you're hoping prompt engineering will somehow make you better at content strategy without actually understanding content strategy, you're going to be disappointed. The prompt is only as good as the thinking behind it.

What Actually Changes in 2026

We're already seeing AI tools that are specifically designed for content briefs. Jasper has brief templates. Frase is integrating more AI into their brief builder. Clearscope is adding AI analysis to their optimization platform.

These will get better. They'll get more integrated into our existing workflows. Eventually, you'll probably just talk to your content calendar tool and it'll generate briefs automatically based on your strategy.

But the fundamental skill—knowing what makes content valuable and how to communicate that clearly—that's not going away. It's just changing form.

The marketers who win are the ones who get good at this now, while it's still a distinct advantage. In two years, everyone will be using AI for briefs. The question is whether you're using it to create better content or just to create more mediocre content faster.

Start Here Tomorrow

Pick one content brief you need to create this week. Before you touch AI, write down:

• The specific business goal (not "traffic," something real)
• Exactly who this is for (get uncomfortably specific)
• Your unique angle (what makes this different from everything else)
• Three things that must be in the piece

Then take those four things and build a prompt around them. Use the structure I outlined earlier. Try it in both ChatGPT and Claude if you have access.

See what you get. Iterate. Refine. Add your own thinking.

Then actually use the brief to create content and see if it works better than your usual process.

That's the whole game. Everything else is just refinement.