Share your best AI workflow. We could show it to 2M+ people.

I use a Claude skill to reduce the manual work involved in my job search. It searches for the latest roles, assists with my applications, and tracks my application journey. I can fully automate the process with Claude scheduling. I download the SKILL file from my GitHub repository (https://github.com/petehawtree/job-search-tracker-skill) and launch it in Claude Desktop. Alternatively, I can download the entire repository and recreate it in my Claude skills directory. I schedule it to run each day or trigger it manually. Each run summarizes the latest activity and tracks it against previous runs. The workflow includes a dashboard for monitoring roles and applications, along with a daily digest that guides me through the new roles it finds. Step-by-step: 1. I download the SKILL file from https://github.com/petehawtree/job-search-tracker-skill. 2. I launch it in Claude Desktop, or download the entire repository and recreate it in my Claude skills directory. 3. I put the workflow on a schedule or trigger it manually each day. 4. I review the daily summary, which is tracked against previous runs. 5. I use the dashboard to monitor roles and applications. 6. I review the daily digest for guidance on the new roles the workflow finds.

I'm planning a housewarming party for about 70 people: 60 adults and 10 children. I knew I wanted to serve a large grazing board, along with a couple of big buckets of ice filled with canned beer, coolers, sparkling water, and other drinks. I told Claude about the party and asked it to create a shopping list based on the number of attendees. Claude produced a cohesive list with six cheeses and approximate quantities for each one. It did the same for the cured meats, crackers, bread, fruit, nuts, jams, and pickled items. It also suggested beverages, including a ratio of beer to coolers and nonalcoholic options. The list included juices and non-caffeinated sodas for the kids, along with a template showing how to lay out the grazing table. This was not a complex use case, but it was very helpful. Step-by-step: 1. I estimated the guest list at about 70 people: 60 adults and 10 children. 2. I described my plan to serve a large grazing board and drinks kept cold in a couple of big buckets of ice. 3. I asked Claude to create a shopping list based on the number of attendees. 4. I used Claude's recommendations for six cheeses, cured meats, crackers, bread, fruit, nuts, jams, and pickled items, including approximate quantities. 5. I reviewed its beverage suggestions, including the beer-to-cooler ratio, sparkling water, juices, and non-caffeinated sodas for the children. 6. I used the layout template to plan how to arrange the grazing table.

I moved from public school to a private school with no autism-specific training, and I found students on the spectrum struggling with one-size-fits-all lessons. AI helped close that gap for both me and my students in about five minutes per lesson. I take a standard lesson and rebuild it around the individual student. I upload only the blank assignment—never any student data—and prompt AI to adapt it to that learner. I include their favorite colors and niche interests, replace abstract examples with personalized ones, add sentence starters, and allow them to draw responses instead of writing dense paragraphs. Step-by-step: 1. I take an existing lesson and create a blank version of the assignment. 2. I upload only the blank assignment to my AI tool, without including any student data. 3. I provide the student’s interests, preferred colors, and reading level. 4. I ask the AI to rebuild the lesson for that specific student. 5. I use personalized examples, sentence starters, and drawing-based response options to make the lesson more accessible. The result is no shutdowns, no walls, and a genuinely engaged and grateful student. One untrained teacher can now individualize any lesson for a unique learner in minutes.

I keep a long wishlist on Audible, but whenever I want a new audiobook, I face the same question: does my library already offer it for free through Libby? Checking hundreds of titles manually feels like too much work, so I often spend a credit instead. I had Claude build a workflow that checks for me. It reads my Audible wishlist and cross-references every title against my library’s Libby catalog, sorting each one into three categories: borrow now, join the waitlist, or not available. The important part was learning to interpret Libby accurately. Badges and time estimates can make an audiobook look ready when it isn’t, and a pending hold can look like an active one. The reliable signal is the exact text on the button: “Borrow” means I can borrow it; anything else means I should wait or move on. Step-by-step: 1. I gave Claude a workflow to read my Audible wishlist. 2. I had it cross-reference every title against my library’s Libby catalog. 3. I had it sort each title into “borrow now,” “join the waitlist,” or “not available.” 4. I configured the workflow to interpret availability using the exact button text rather than relying on badges or time estimates. 5. Before spending an Audible credit, I check whether Libby already has the audiobook ready.

Instead of relying on a single AI chat, I structure the work as an executive team of specialist perspectives. I define the problem, assign roles such as CTO, product leader, economist, marketer, and skeptic, and have each expert analyze it independently. Then I run several rounds of critique so they can challenge one another’s assumptions before synthesizing their areas of agreement and disagreement. The process ends with a recommendation that includes the rationale and any remaining uncertainties. Step-by-step: 1. Define the problem clearly. 2. Assign specialist roles, such as CTO, product leader, economist, marketer, and skeptic. 3. Have each expert analyze the problem independently. 4. Run several rounds of critique in which the experts challenge one another’s assumptions. 5. Synthesize the areas of agreement and disagreement. 6. Produce a final recommendation with its rationale and remaining uncertainties.

I read the news every day, but it had become increasingly depressing and was making me miserable. What bothered me most was that it also felt inaccurate: although bad things are happening, there have been many positive developments over the past five years that rarely receive sustained coverage. Major news sites might publish an article or two about them, but those stories are quickly buried under negativity. I wanted a way to get only positive news stories in my feed each day. Keyword filters did not work: “record” and “breakthrough” also appear in stories about record wildfire seasons, while “war” can appear in “war ends.” Off-the-shelf sentiment analysis was not useful either. A happy press release about layoffs can be classified as positive, while a dry factual story about a disease being eliminated may be classified as neutral. So I trained a basic artificial version of my personality using a series of prompts about what I consider positive in the world. I connected it to Mistral through OpenRouter and gave it access to public RSS feeds from news sites I already trusted. This eventually became Rally News, which I published on Google Play. iOS has been more difficult. The app surfaces positive stories from more than 20 news sites in an endless scroll, giving me an alternative to my uncomfortable TikTok addiction. Because I made it public, I decided not to host article text: publishers keep their traffic and revenue, while the tool remains ethical. The system runs on a GitHub Actions cron job that pushes stories to a PHP and MySQL database. I built the app without coding experience for about $25 per month. Step-by-step: 1. I collected RSS feeds from established publishers I already trusted and stored the list as configuration. I started with about 10 feeds instead of a few hundred so I could realistically read the output. 2. I set up a scheduled GitHub Actions cron job to run a Python script that pulls new items from every feed. 3. I deduplicated incoming articles against the database using the URL and a normalized title. Syndicated stories frequently reappear under slightly different URLs, and I did not want to pay to evaluate the same article twice. 4. I wrote the filter prompt as a long persona document rather than a one-line instruction. It explains what I consider progress, what I consider a puff piece, and which cases should fail—for example, celebrity news is not good news, a company announcing an intention is not the same as taking action, and a local feel-good story without wider significance does not qualify. 5. I sent each new article to an LLM through OpenRouter and required JSON output containing a pass-or-fail decision and a short justification. 6. For the first few weeks, I read the justifications every day. Whenever I disagreed with the model, I added a new rule to the persona document. That review loop required nearly all of the actual work. 7. I wrote passing articles to MySQL with only the headline, source, link, and metadata, leaving the article body with the publisher. 8. I pointed the website and mobile app to the same database. 9. I added a second GitHub Actions job that assembles a daily newsletter from the same data through Brevo, allowing one evaluation pass to feed three surfaces.

I use AI to create personalized tools and social stories that help therapists and group-home staff better understand my son’s complex disability and support his independence as an adult. Step-by-step: 1. I use AI to create personalized tools for my son. 2. I create social stories that help therapists and group-home staff better understand his complex disability. 3. I use these resources to support his independence as an adult.

AI is good at generating polished answers, but polished answers are not always your answers. When people ask AI for help with writing, strategy, or difficult decisions, it can jump too quickly to a conclusion and fill in beliefs the user has not fully examined. I created a thought-partner agent that interviews me before producing recommendations or drafts. Its job is to ask probing questions, challenge weak assumptions, surface contradictions, and separate my actual views from ideas suggested by the AI. Instead of writing for me immediately, it helps me clarify my position first. Step-by-step: 1. I give the agent the topic, decision, or idea I want to explore. 2. I tell it not to draft the final output yet. Its first job is to interview me. 3. I have it ask one focused question at a time about my reasoning, evidence, assumptions, audience, and uncertainty. 4. I require it to challenge vague claims and point out contradictions or overlap with my previous thinking. 5. I ask it to clearly separate: - conclusions I stated - ideas the AI proposed - issues that remain unresolved 6. I continue until the central belief, argument, or decision becomes clear. 7. I have the agent create a structured synthesis containing the core thesis, supporting reasoning, counterarguments, open questions, and useful language from the discussion. 8. I pass that synthesis to a writing, planning, or execution agent. I end up with a position that reflects my actual thinking rather than a plausible answer generated by AI. The final writing or strategy is more original, more consistent, and easier for downstream agents to execute.

A reusable Claude Skill called `trust-due-diligence`, packaged as a `.skill` file. It is not a single report; it is a methodology made up of a `SKILL.md` file and three reference documents that teach Claude a repeatable process for investigating a named person, company, coach, or offer before you commit money or trust to them. Once installed, it activates automatically whenever you ask something like “deep dive on X” or “is this legit,” so you do not need to explain the process each time. Step-by-step: 1. Package the `trust-due-diligence` Claude Skill as a `.skill` file. 2. Include a `SKILL.md` file and three reference documents. 3. Use the files together to teach Claude a repeatable due-diligence methodology. 4. Install the Skill so it activates automatically for prompts such as “deep dive on X” or “is this legit.” 5. Use it to investigate a named person, company, coach, or offer before committing money or trust.

Start with the property, not a generic landscaping template. Upload photos, measurements, site constraints, current problems, future plans, budget limits, and the look you want. Then use AI to build a complete picture of how the property functions today and how it should evolve over time. Next, work area by area. For overcrowded garden beds, map every tree and shrub, then assess mature size, spacing, health, irrigation coverage, sightlines, and maintenance demands. From there, use AI to determine what should stay, what should move, what should be removed, and how each bed should be reshaped and edged. Convert each recommendation into an execution plan that includes: Step-by-step: 1. The target design 2. A step-by-step build sequence 3. Required materials and tools 4. Budget and priority level 5. Seasonal timing 6. A year-by-year maintenance plan Finally, connect every individual project into one master roadmap. Plan the garden beds, trees, lawn, irrigation, drainage, driveway, shelterbelts, recreation areas, and future buildings together so one improvement does not create a problem somewhere else. The result is a living property operating system. Add a new photo, issue, or idea, and the plan updates with the next best action.

I’m a commercial excellence consultant for industrial B2B businesses, and very few of the clients I speak with have a current view of the competition in their market. Nobody has mapped the competitive landscape recently—sometimes they never have. Clients can often name the companies in the market, but they can’t explain what those competitors do differently or why a customer would choose one over them. That gap is expensive. The mid-market manufacturers I work with, typically in the $75 million to $300 million range, usually don’t have a strategy team to close it. The alternatives are consulting rates for research that goes stale as soon as it’s delivered or a generic template that says the same five things about every market. Neither option is necessarily wrong, but neither is very useful. So I built a Claude Skill: an instruction set that runs live research every time instead of pattern-matching to a generic answer. The input is simple: the company name, its brand voice, the research scope, the geography, and a known competitor list if one is available. Before researching a single competitor, the Skill states the decision the report needs to inform—for example, whether to enter a vertical, how to price against a rival, or where to direct sales next quarter. It checks the client’s own website and capabilities next; an early version once recommended something the client already had. It then maps the competitive field across five tiers: direct, adjacent, disruptor, new entrant, and aspirational for PE-backed clients. It checks Asia-Pacific specifically because that’s the blind spot I’ve seen missed most often. Market size carries a confidence flag instead of false precision. Findings become battlecards phrased the way reps actually talk, rather than in analyst language. The report also includes a threat ranking with a timeline attached, then closes with three opportunities, three risks, and four to six moves for the quarter. Every recommendation is filtered through the original decision instead of being included simply because the research was interesting. The output is two files: an interactive HTML report and a matching PDF. Both are built entirely in HTML and CSS rather than with canvas charts, which can break in exactly the ways that matter—blank on load or missing from the PDF. None of what makes this useful is the AI itself. The important work is naming the decision before researching a competitor, checking what the client already has, tagging confidence instead of faking precision, and writing like a rep rather than an analyst. That’s the difference between a report that gets skimmed once and one that gets acted on. This is one piece of a bigger system I run for industrial manufacturers applying AI to their commercial function. I teach the underlying version of this workflow live. Step-by-step: 1. I provide Claude Skill with the company name, brand voice, research scope, geography, and known competitor list, if available. 2. I define the decision the report needs to inform, such as entering a vertical, pricing against a rival, or directing sales next quarter. 3. I have the Skill check the client’s website and capabilities before researching competitors. 4. I map the competitive field across direct, adjacent, disruptor, new entrant, and, for PE-backed clients, aspirational competitors. 5. I check Asia-Pacific specifically to address a commonly missed blind spot. 6. I assign confidence flags to market-size estimates rather than presenting false precision. 7. I turn the findings into sales-rep-friendly battlecards and add a threat ranking with a timeline. 8. I close the report with three opportunities, three risks, and four to six quarterly moves tied back to the original decision. 9. I deliver the result as an interactive HTML report and a matching PDF, using HTML and CSS instead of canvas charts.

I needed home insurance and was asked to estimate the value of all my personal belongings. I asked Claude to search my personal email and make a list of all the purchases I had made in the past year. I asked my husband to do the same and share his list with me. I also made a list of our valuables and took a picture of each room in the house. I gave all of that information to Claude, which produced a list of everything I owned and estimated its rough value. It cross-referenced the purchases with the items visible in the photos to make sure I did not double-count anything. I sent the list to my insurance broker, who said it was extremely helpful and could also serve as supporting evidence if I ever needed to submit an insurance claim.

I built a reusable AI skill that turns any topic and source material into a self-paced course. It follows the same assembly line every time: modules with learning goals, real lesson text, working YouTube videos, quizzes with explanations for wrong answers, and a simple local web course packaged in a folder-based library. Each new course gets its own folder. It works across subjects, but I still review high-stakes content myself. I also treat video quality as more than whether a link works. Step-by-step: 1. I provide a topic and source material. 2. The skill splits the topic into modules and defines learning goals for each one. 3. It writes the lesson text. 4. It finds real YouTube videos and verifies that they work. 5. It builds quizzes that explain incorrect answers. 6. It packages everything as a simple local web course. 7. It adds the new course to the folder-based library in its own folder. 8. I review high-stakes content and assess video quality beyond whether the links work.

I used to create a skeptical VC investor persona through prompting whenever I ran ideas and actual business plans through AI. Recently, after working on a business plan for weeks, I used Claude Cowork with Opus 5/High to evaluate the same concept. Instead of prompting for critique and redesign each time, I built a Skill upfront. The concept is the same, but the Skill makes the execution much more effective. It reviews ideas or detailed business plans, researches first, and critiques only after that. It also analyzes and suggests wedges and new moats and, when instructed, generates detailed business plans. It works well as a one-shot analysis, but it is most effective when I push back and challenge it further. I’m sharing the Claude Skill for free under the MIT license: https://github.com/zszendro/vc-teardown Step-by-step: 1. I used to prompt AI to role-play a skeptical VC investor when reviewing ideas and business plans. 2. After working on a business plan for several weeks, I ran the same concept through Claude Cowork with Opus 5/High. 3. Instead of prompting separately for critique and redesign, I built a Skill upfront. 4. I designed the Skill to research first and critique only afterward. 5. I used it to review ideas or detailed business plans, analyze and suggest wedges and new moats, and generate detailed business plans when instructed. 6. I continued the analysis by pushing back and challenging the Skill beyond its initial one-shot response. 7. I shared the Claude Skill for free under the MIT license at https://github.com/zszendro/vc-teardown

I used to open calls by asking people to remind me where we left off. The notes existed, but they were scattered across transcripts that nobody reviewed. I built two scheduled tasks that work together: one files every meeting at the end of the day, and the other sends me a prep brief every morning. At the end of each day, the first task pulls the verbatim transcript of every meeting I had into a shared Notion database. I use the transcript rather than the AI summary because summaries may be useful that afternoon but are less useful three weeks later when I need the exact thing somebody said. Each meeting becomes a page with the date, client, and attendees stored as real relations rather than text, so everything is filterable later. My business partner has access to the same database, so neither of us has to recap our calls for the other. At 7 a.m., the second task reads my Outlook calendar, finds the email thread or threads tied to each meeting, reads the associated transcripts in Notion, and writes a short prep brief for each one: what we said last time, what I owe them, and what is still open. The part that took the most thought was deciding what should not be filed in the main database. Personal meetings are skipped by keyword. Small internal meetings are screened for topics such as pay, hiring, legal matters, or client-confidential material. Those meetings are routed to a separate database with different permissions. When a meeting is ambiguous, it defaults to the restricted database. Failing toward privacy is the right default when a robot is making the decision. Step-by-step: 1. I turned on Zoom AI Companion so every meeting produces a transcript, then connected Zoom, Notion, and Outlook. 2. I built a Notion database for meeting notes with Date, Client, and Attendees as relation properties connected to existing Clients and People databases. These relations make the notes findable later. 3. I wrote the end-of-day task to pull each transcript verbatim, create a page, match the client by keyword against my client list, and add attendees based on the transcript speakers. 4. I filtered the speaker list because notetaker bots appear as attendees. I removed Fireflies, Otter, Fathom, and the other notetaker bots, and automatically created a person page for anyone who was genuinely new. 5. I deduplicated meetings using the title and date. If a page already existed as a placeholder, I updated it in place instead of creating a second one. 6. I added a skip list for personal meetings and a confidentiality screen that routes sensitive internal meetings to a separate, permission-restricted database. When the classification is unclear, it defaults to restricted. 7. I wrote the morning task to read that day’s calendar, search email and transcripts for each attendee and company, and produce one short brief per meeting covering the last contact, open commitments, and what I owe them. 8. I scheduled both tasks: the filing task for the end of the day and the briefing task for early morning.

I built a family calendar with Lovable and Claude that integrates with our Google Calendars and Todoist projects. My husband, son, dog, and I were struggling to track our schedules in one place. Although we had shared our calendars through Google, we did not have a central view displayed in the house, and the interface became cluttered when we tracked multiple calendars. We had considered buying a Skylight calendar for years, but it costs $300, and we were not convinced we needed all of its extra features. I decided to build my own instead. Step-by-step: 1. I created a product requirements document (PRD) for a family calendar in Claude. It prompted me to choose the available views, decide how to organize each family member’s calendars, support both events and tasks, and add extras such as the day’s weather and a photo background. 2. I shared the PRD with Lovable, which built the first version of the calendar. Lovable helped me integrate my Google Calendars and Todoist projects so that all of our events and tasks appeared in one place. It also helped me integrate Google Photos so our family photos could rotate in the background. 3. I launched the calendar as a password-protected website so any family member could access it from anywhere. 4. I placed the calendar on an iPad in our kitchen and edited it as we used it, learning which features were most and least helpful. I also added calendars for my in-laws when they visited for several months at a time. Claude continues to help me draft new requirements, which I share with Lovable. The calendar is tailored to our needs and costs much less than the Skylight option. The photo feature also makes it feel personal, and I look forward to continuing to evolve it over time.

My father takes a ton of different medications every day for various conditions, and also sees a lot of different doctors. I was concerned about how they were all interacting with each other and if the doctors at different practices were even getting the full picture. I gave Claude a comprehensive list of all of the drugs and his medical history, and asked for a deep research report about potential interactions. Claude provided a thorough list of issues to bring up to his doctors about dangerous interactions and situations that might be getting missed, referencing up-to-date journals, guidelines, and research that would've taken me days. It also laid everything out in an easy-to-read format, and provided specific instructions on who to contact and what specific questions to ask — helping turn a potentially stressful and disjointed doctor conversation into a strong action plan. Step-by-step: 1. I assembled a comprehensive list of medications, medical history, conditions, and the different doctors involved. 2. I asked Claude for a deep research report on potential interactions and risks that might be missed across separate practices. 3. I required the report to reference current journals, guidelines, and research. 4. I had it organize the findings into concrete issues, who to contact, and the exact questions to ask. 5. I used the report as a doctor-ready conversation plan rather than trying to interpret or act on the findings alone.

I recently bought a house & had an inspection done as a closing condition. I uploaded the inspection report (80 pages) to Claude and asked it to make a list of home maintenance tasks by timeline (closing week, seasonally, etc.). Then, based on that list, I had it create one-off or annually recurring calendar events in my personal Google Calendar, with my husband invited to each event. It was super helpful because the inspection report clearly noted when the maintenance tasks were completed and suggested a frequency for the future. Step-by-step: 1. I uploaded the full 80-page home inspection report to Claude. 2. I asked it to extract every maintenance item and organize the work by closing week, season, and recurring frequency. 3. I had it use the report’s completion dates and recommended intervals to calculate when each task should happen next. 4. I reviewed the list for anything that needed to be corrected or combined. 5. I asked Claude to create one-off and annually recurring Google Calendar events and invite my husband to each one.

Many organizations have critical process knowledge that exists only in employees’ heads. When someone has a question, they have to track down the right expert, ask questions others may have already asked, and hope they remember every detail. This doesn’t scale and creates knowledge silos. I built a workflow that turns conversations with subject matter experts into structured, searchable organizational knowledge. Instead of asking employees to write documentation, an AI interviewer guides them through the process they know best, converts the conversation into well-structured documentation, and publishes it to an AI-powered knowledge base that anyone can query. Step-by-step: 1. Ask an employee to choose a business process they know well. 2. Have an AI interviewer ask follow-up questions to capture the complete workflow, decisions, exceptions, and best practices through a natural conversation. 3. Save the interview transcript. 4. Use an LLM to convert the transcript into structured documentation with clear sections, steps, decision points, and FAQs. 5. Store the documentation in a searchable knowledge repository and index it in a vector database. 6. Let employees ask questions through an AI assistant that retrieves the most relevant documentation and answers in natural language. 7. Repeat the process over time as processes evolve or additional experts contribute new knowledge. Instead of repeatedly interrupting the same subject matter experts, employees can get consistent answers from an AI assistant backed by documented organizational knowledge. The organization captures valuable expertise before it’s lost, reduces knowledge silos, improves onboarding, and creates documentation simply by having conversations.