Sonnet 5.5 prompts for documents, slides and spreadsheets

A useful Sonnet 5.5 prompt specifies the deliverable, allowed evidence and the checks it must pass. Asking for a “professional presentation” leaves the model to invent too much. Give it source material, an audience and a definition of done, then verify the result before sharing it.

Anthropic’s release announcement identifies documents, slides and spreadsheets as intended strengths. The templates below are original editorial examples for those tasks. They are not transcripts of a successful Sonnet run or proof of model performance: our attempted Claude Code access was blocked by organization policy. Use them as starting points and test with your own approved account.

Prepare a source packet

Keep a short, explicit packet containing the audience, objective, source facts, unresolved questions and output format. Label invented practice data as synthetic. For business material, remove sensitive data unless your organization’s approved model access permits that use.

A text response, a rendered file and a checked deliverable are different stages. The Sonnet model specification describes text and image input with text output. Creating an actual PPTX or XLSX file depends on the surrounding application, tools and permissions. Do not promise file creation merely because a chat response contains a slide outline.

Template 1: a one-page decision brief

Use this when you need a decision document from supplied notes. Replace the bracketed fields before running it.

Create a one-page decision brief for [audience].
Decision to support: [decision].
Use only the source packet below. Do not invent numbers, customer quotes,
product capabilities or dates. Mark unsupported items as "needs evidence".

Return:
1. Recommendation, explicitly separated from source facts.
2. Three decision criteria and how the available evidence addresses them.
3. Main risks and unresolved questions.
4. Next action, owner placeholder and date placeholder.
5. A claim-to-source table referencing source IDs.

Keep the brief within 500 words. If the sources conflict, preserve the
conflict rather than silently choosing one. Source packet: [paste sources].

The 500-word limit is a formatting target, not a guarantee of compliance. Check the word count and verify each source ID. A polished recommendation can still be unsupported. If there is not enough evidence to make the decision, an honest list of missing information is a useful output.

For review, underline each factual assertion and trace it to the supplied packet. Separate “the notes state this” from “the model recommends this.” A recommendation can be reasonable without becoming an established fact.

Template 2: a six-slide presentation outline

This prompt produces an outline that a presentation tool or editor can turn into slides. It does not claim native video or slide-file generation.

Turn the approved brief below into a six-slide outline for [audience].
The presentation's goal is [one decision or action].
Use only the approved brief; do not add market statistics.

For each slide return: title, one main message, up to three supporting
points, suggested visual, speaker notes and source IDs.
Use this sequence: problem, evidence, options, recommendation, risks,
next steps. Mark any missing visual or missing evidence explicitly.
Avoid repeating the same paragraph on every slide.
Approved brief: [paste the checked brief].

Inspect the outline in presentation order. Each slide should have one message and advance the decision. Check whether the suggested chart has real supporting data; a chart instruction is not a dataset. A screenshot suggestion must use a real permitted screenshot, not an invented interface.

After rendering slides with your chosen tools, inspect layout and text overflow at the actual presentation size. Review speaker notes separately from visible text, because notes can introduce unsupported claims that never appear on the slide itself. Exporting a file is not the final quality check.

Template 3: review a small spreadsheet

For a controlled practice task, use a CSV with columns item, quantity and unit_price. Keep currency and units in the task description. The following prompt asks for an auditable calculation rather than an attractive narrative.

Review this CSV as a small USD expense table.
Columns: item, quantity, unit_price. Treat quantity as a count and
unit_price as USD per item. Do not fill missing values silently.

Return:
1. Validation issues, including missing, negative or nonnumeric values.
2. Each valid row's quantity × unit_price.
3. The sum of valid rows, with excluded rows listed separately.
4. The exact formula or short reproducible script used.
5. A distinction between source values and calculated values.

Do not claim the total is verified unless it has been independently
recalculated. CSV: [paste a non-sensitive CSV].

A simple practice packet is: 3 notebooks at $4.50 each, 2 pens at $1.25 each, and 1 folder at $2.00. Independent arithmetic gives $13.50 + $2.50 + $2.00 = $18.00. These are synthetic teaching values, not customer spending data or a Sonnet-generated result.

Check row-level values before checking the grand total. Two incorrect rows can accidentally cancel out. For money, use decimal-safe arithmetic in the independent checker and define how rounding works. Large sheets also require care around hidden rows, formulas and units; a pasted CSV does not preserve every feature of the original workbook.

Download and evaluate the templates

Download the original prompt pack and synthetic CSV. The pack contains editorial templates and an independently checked calculation, not model-generated finished documents. Keep the unedited source packet with your output so someone else can repeat the review.

For each deliverable, record the requested format, missing evidence, factual corrections and time spent editing. If you compare effort settings, use the same packet and review criteria. See the Sonnet effort guide and API cost guide before interpreting speed or cost differences.