When using Claude, you can dramatically improve its performance by using the system parameter to give it a role. This technique, known as role prompting, is the most powerful way to use system prompts with Claude.
The right role can turn Claude from a general assistant into your virtual domain expert!
System prompt tips: Use the system parameter to set Claude’s role. Put everything else, like task-specific instructions, in the user turn instead.
Use the system parameter in the Messages API to set Claude’s role:
import anthropicclient = anthropic.Anthropic()response = client.messages.create( model="claude-3-5-sonnet-20241022", max_tokens=2048, system="You are a seasoned data scientist at a Fortune 500 company.",# <-- role prompt messages=[{"role":"user","content":"Analyze this dataset for anomalies: <dataset>{{DATASET}}</dataset>"}])print(response.content)
Role prompting tip: Experiment with roles! A data scientist might see different insights than a marketing strategist for the same data. A data scientist specializing in customer insight analysis for Fortune 500 companies might yield different results still!
Without a role, Claude might miss critical issues:
Role
Content
User
Analyze this software licensing agreement for potential risks: <contract> {{CONTRACT}} </contract>
Focus on indemnification, liability, and IP ownership.
Assistant
Here’s a summary of the key points in the software licensing agreement:
1. Indemnification (Section 8): - We indemnify the vendor against claims arising from our use.
2. Limitation of Liability (Section 9): - Damages capped at $500.
3. IP Ownership (Section 12): - We retain ownership of our modifications.
Overall, the agreement seems standard. The indemnification and liability clauses are typical, and we maintain our IP rights.
With a role, Claude catches critical issues that could cost millions:
Role
Content
User
You are the General Counsel of a Fortune 500 tech company. We’re considering this software licensing agreement for our core data infrastructure: <contract> {{CONTRACT}} </contract>
Analyze it for potential risks, focusing on indemnification, liability, and IP ownership. Give your professional opinion.
Assistant
I’ve reviewed the software licensing agreement, and I have serious concerns that could expose our company to significant risks:
1. Indemnification (Section 8): - Critical Issue: We indemnify the vendor against “any and all claims” arising from our use. - Risk: This could hold us liable even for the vendor’s negligence or product defects. - Recommendation: Reject. Limit our indemnity to claims arising from our violation of the agreement.
2. Limitation of Liability (Section 9): - Critical Issue: Damages capped at $500, including direct damages. - Risk: Grossly inadequate. A critical failure in our data infrastructure could cost us millions in lost revenue and reputational damage. - Recommendation: Reject. Negotiate for cap at 12 months of fees for direct damages, and carve-outs for data breaches.
3. IP Ownership (Section 12): - Critical Issue: Vendor gains joint ownership of our modifications and integrations. - Risk: They could use or sell our proprietary algorithms or data insights to competitors. - Recommendation: Reject. We must retain full ownership of our work.
Professional Opinion: Do not sign this agreement. It is grossly unfavorable and exposes us to unacceptable levels of risk. If the vendor refuses to renegotiate these terms, I strongly advise exploring alternative providers or accelerating our in-house solution. The potential costs of proceeding with this agreement far outweigh any short-term gains.
Analyze this dataset of our Q2 financials: <data> {{FINANCIALS}} </data>
Highlight key trends and recommend actions.
Assistant
Here’s a summary of your Q2 financials:
1. Revenue: $15.2M, up 22% YoY. Enterprise client base grew 30%. 2. Gross Margin: 72%, up 3% from Q1. 3. EBITDA Margin: 18%, down 2% due to R&D investments. 4. Cash Flow: $4.1M operating, $28M in reserves.
Overall, financials look strong with revenue growth and healthy margins. Increased R&D spending is impacting profitability but could pay off long-term. Maintain current course.
With a role, Claude delivers actionable insights:
Role
Content
User
You are the CFO of a high-growth B2B SaaS company. We’re in a board meeting discussing our Q2 financials: <data> {{FINANCIALS}} </data>
Analyze key trends, flag concerns, and recommend strategic actions. Our investors want aggressive growth but are wary of our burn rate.
Assistant
Board members, here’s my analysis of our Q2 financials:
1. Revenue ($15.2M, +22% YoY): - Insight: Enterprise growth (+30%) is outpacing overall growth. - Flag: SMB segment declined 5%. - Action: Reallocate 20% of SMB marketing budget to enterprise sales. Task product to simplify SMB onboarding.
2. Margins (Gross: 72%, +3% QoQ; EBITDA: 18%, -2% QoQ): - Insight: Infrastructure optimizations boosted gross margins. - Flag: R&D spend on AI features dented EBITDA. - Action: No change. Our AI roadmap is critical for enterprise stickiness.
3. Cash ($4.1M OCF, $28M reserves): - Insight: 15-month runway at current burn. - Flag: CAC up 20%, eroding LTV/CAC. - Action: Freeze non-essential hires. Implement sales funnel analytics to cut CAC by 15% in Q3.
Strategic Stance: We’re threading the needle between growth and burn. Enterprise focus is our growth engine—invest there. But watch SMB churn; it could bleed into enterprise. Our AI bet is sound, but we must convert it to ARR by Q4, or we cut R&D by 30%.
In sum: Double down on enterprise, streamline SMB, optimize sales, and monetize AI. Questions?
