Free Marketing–Sales SLA Prompt

Short answer: Define the handoff agreement that protects speed, quality, ownership, and feedback.

Built by StackSwap · Updated August 28, 2026

OUTPUTSLA, definitions, escalation path, and inspection cadence.
REPLACESHandoff documents nobody follows.
RUNS INChatGPT · Claude · Codex

BEFORE YOU COPY

Bring the context. Skip the blank page.

Collect the behavior or handoff to change, current process, roles, decision rights, evidence of failure, capacity, rollout constraints, and the inspection date that will prove adoption. The prompt separates facts from assumptions, compares viable paths, and produces the promised artifact instead of generic advice.

  1. Add contextProvide your company, buyer, motion, constraints, and decision.
  2. Run the workflowPaste the free prompt into ChatGPT, Claude, or Codex.
  3. Inspect the artifactReview assumptions, risks, actions, and the quality check.

FULL PROMPT · FREE FOREVER

Copy the full GTM workflow.

No account or email required. Copy it into ChatGPT, Claude, or Codex, add your context, and make the decision in front of you.

Copy the prompt

## StackSwap execution contract

You are running a StackSwap operator workflow. Your job is to turn the user's real context into a decision-ready GTM artifact, not a generic explanation.

1. Start by extracting the objective, audience, motion, constraints, available evidence, decision, and definition of success.
2. If a missing fact would materially change the answer, ask up to 3 precise questions. Otherwise state reasonable assumptions and proceed.
3. Separate supplied facts, assumptions, unknowns, and recommendations. Never invent customer evidence, performance claims, market data, or proof.
4. Use the workflow below as the default operating method, adapting it to the user's context. Explain important trade-offs briefly.
5. Produce the promised artifact first. Make it copy-ready, specific enough to run, and structured for the user's actual team or buyer.
6. Include the evidence used, the verification or inspection loop, the main failure modes, and what would change the recommendation.
7. End with: Assumptions; Risks or failure modes; First 3 actions with owner and timing; and a short quality check showing what would make this artifact trustworthy.

### Output contract

Every workflow must make its output observable. Name the artifact, its required fields, the evidence or inputs behind each important claim, and the acceptance check that determines whether it is usable. If the workflow is a decision, show the viable alternatives, criteria, recommendation, runner-up, reversibility, and stop/continue rule. If the workflow is a copy-ready asset, include the final asset before commentary.

### Evidence and verification

Use the user's evidence first. Label sourced facts, assumptions, estimates, and recommendations. Prefer a small test, review, calculation, or comparison that can falsify the recommendation. Never treat an AI assertion as verification.

### Follow-on behavior

Name the next useful workflow only when it follows from the current artifact. Link the handoff to a concrete decision, missing evidence, or unresolved risk; do not recommend a generic tour of the library.

### Cross-platform behavior

This prompt is designed to work in ordinary chat, Claude, and Codex. Do not depend on hidden system instructions, a specific model, slash commands, or unavailable tools. If tools or files are available, use them only when they improve evidence quality; otherwise complete the workflow from the provided context.

---

---
name: marketing-sales-sla
description: "Design a marketing-sales SLA around lead definitions, routing, response, feedback, ownership, and measurable service quality."
allowed-tools: Read Write WebSearch WebFetch
metadata: { author: Nick French / StackSwap, version: '1.0', product: Operator Playbook }
---
# Marketing–Sales SLA

An SLA is a behavior and evidence contract, not a document teams cite after a lead is lost.

## When to use it
Use when handoffs fail, definitions differ, response is slow, or feedback disappears. Do not use it to negotiate targets without capacity or measurement.

## Inputs to collect
Collect ICP, MQL/SQL definitions, signal thresholds, routing, ownership, response window, disqualification, capacity, CRM fields, escalation, baseline, and review cadence.

## Method
1. Define the shared customer and business outcome.
2. Make eligibility, acceptance, rejection, routing, response, and follow-up observable.
3. Assign owners, SLAs, exception paths, escalation, and feedback fields.
4. Test edge cases and audit a sample of handoffs.
5. Review quality and conversion, then revise rules when evidence changes.

## Output
Produce definitions, acceptance contract, routing/SLA matrix, handoff fields, rejection reasons, escalation policy, dashboard, review cadence, and rollout plan.

## Verification and failure modes
Replay real leads and inspect time-to-action and downstream quality. Guard against points-based qualification, SLA gaming, orphan leads, capacity-blind promises, and no feedback loop.

## Quality gate
Both teams can apply the contract to the same record and know who acts next, by when, and why.

Free forever. No email gate.

Was this prompt useful?

Thumbs up if it helped. Thumbs down if it needs work.

THE PROMPT IS THE START

Want an independent read on the real project?

Start the free discovery QA audit. Show StackSwap what your builder already knows, then get a focused next move.

Start a free QA audit

QUESTIONS

About this free prompt

What does this marketing–sales sla prompt help with?

Define the handoff agreement that protects speed, quality, ownership, and feedback.

Who should use this marketing–sales sla prompt?

This free GTM prompt is for B2B SaaS founders, GTM leaders, and RevOps operators who need a useful first draft without starting from a blank page.

What should I add before running this marketing–sales sla prompt?

Add your company, buyer, GTM motion, constraints, and the decision you need to make. Better context produces a more specific artifact and makes weak assumptions easier to spot.

What output does this marketing–sales sla prompt produce?

SLA, definitions, escalation path, and inspection cadence. The workflow is designed to produce that artifact instead of generic GTM advice.

Can I use this marketing–sales sla prompt in ChatGPT, Claude, or Codex?

Yes. The workflow is designed for ordinary chat, Claude, and Codex, with platform-specific formats available to copy for free.

How do I get a better result from this marketing–sales sla prompt?

Include real customer language, current numbers, and hard constraints, then inspect the assumptions and risks in the result. Treat the first output as a decision artifact to improve, not an unquestionable answer.

RELATED GTM PROMPTS

Founder-Led Sales → First RepDecide when and how to hand founder-led sales to the first rep without breaking the motion.GTM Hiring ScorecardsHire GTM reps against outcomes and observable behaviors instead of charisma.Rep Ramp & EnablementCreate a measurable ramp with certification gates, coaching, and early-warning signals.Comp Plan DesignerDesign compensation that drives the behavior and economics the motion needs.