A Claude prompt that turns a home-inspection report and a contract into a buyer-facing PDF, a structured negotiation analysis, and a draft repair-request addendum. Fill in the fields, copy the prompt, paste it to Claude along with the two PDFs.
Step 1 — Fill in the deal info
Your info (buyer's agent)
Negotiation calibration
Step 2 — Copy the prompt and paste it to Claude
Yellow = unfilled placeholder. Green = your value.
Important: when you paste the prompt to Claude, attach the home inspection report PDF and the executed contract PDF in the same message. Optional attachments: attorney review correspondence, seller's property condition disclosure, any repair addenda or riders.
Step 3 — What you'll need, where to run it, what you'll get back
Where to run it
Open Claude in Cowork mode (desktop app), or use claude.ai with file uploads enabled, or any Claude environment with file tools.
Start a new conversation. Paste the prompt as your first message.
Attach both PDFs (inspection report + executed contract) in the same message. Claude will read both before producing anything.
What Claude will do
Read both documents cover-to-cover.
Come back with a small batch of clarifying questions (buyer name confirmation, posture and stage if any field was missed).
Produce the structured analysis in chat — executive summary, top issues, items worth requesting, items better left alone, cost summary, contract review, strategy, draft inspection-request language, attorney disclaimer.
Build a multi-page branded PDF report for the buyer.
Draft a separate repair-request addendum suitable for attorney review.
Run a verification pass — every section reference cited matches a real section in the inspection report, every page reference is correct, severity counts are accurate, contract facts are right.
What you'll get back
A 15–22 page PDF — cover, table of contents, six sections with divider pages, recap, disclaimer, back cover with your contact info.
A repair-request addendum draft in Markdown, with a formal letter for your attorney, an item summary table, and internal notes explaining the reasoning, fallback positions, and walk-away triggers.
A full structured analysis in chat, with cited section and page references throughout.
Tips that materially improve the output
If the contract is a flattened scan and the body text isn't extractable, Claude will say so and flag what needs attorney review rather than guessing. That's correct behavior — don't override it.
If your buyers wrote any scope-limiting language in the offer letter (e.g., "environmental, structural, and mechanical only"), Claude will honor it. That's leverage — don't ask it to ignore it.
If the inspection report cover lists a different name than the contract (inspectors sometimes type the seller's name by mistake), Claude will ask. Answer honestly.
Cost ranges in the output are conservative regional estimates, not bids. The "reasonable inspection-credit ask" is usually a fraction of total cost — Claude knows this.
Quick troubleshooting
Claude can't read the PDFs → use a Claude version with file-upload support (Cowork mode, claude.ai with attachments enabled). Re-upload if needed.
The PDF rendering fails → ask Claude to use Playwright (the default), or to fall back to print-to-PDF from the HTML it generated.
The output looks generic or hedges everything → say "be specific, cite section numbers and pages, give me dollar ranges." Claude will sharpen up.
Section references in the output don't match your report → tell Claude to re-verify against the actual document. It should self-correct.
Legal note: nothing this prompt produces is legal advice. Every output includes a disclaimer reminding the buyer that contract interpretation, attorney review riders, and "as-is" language must be reviewed by a licensed attorney in their state. Don't strip that disclaimer.
Step 4 — Before you paste, run this checklist
Three things have to be in the message you send to Claude. Miss any of them and you'll get a worse result or no result.
1. The prompt (copied from Step 2)
All ten fields filled in — buyer name(s), property address, state, region, your name, brokerage, email, phone, posture, deal stage.
No yellow placeholders left in the prompt preview. Yellow means unfilled; everything should be green.
Copied with the Copy entire prompt button (this captures the full text, not just the visible portion).
2. The home inspection report PDF
The full report, not the summary. Typically 30–80 pages from a licensed home inspector.
Native PDF if possible. Scanned/image-only PDFs work but Claude has to OCR the text — slightly less reliable on section references and page numbers.
Attach it in the same message as the prompt, not a follow-up message.
3. The executed contract of sale PDF
Fully executed (signed by buyer and seller). Pre-attorney-review or post-attorney-review both work — whatever's current.
If the contract is a flattened scan (most common when sent through DocuSign or dotloop), that's fine — Claude will extract what it can and flag the rest for your attorney.
Include any attached riders or addenda in the same PDF or attach them separately: as-is rider, oil-tank rider, environmental rider, septic rider, lead-paint disclosure, seller's property condition disclosure, and the offer letter if it contained scope-limiting language ("we will not nickel and dime," "inspections limited to environmental, structural, mechanical," etc.).
The order, in one sentence
Fill in the fields → click Copy entire prompt → open Claude → paste the prompt → attach the inspection PDF and the contract PDF in the same message → hit send → answer any clarifying questions Claude asks → review the three deliverables Claude returns.
What to do with the output
Send the PDF to the buyers. It's the buyer-facing artifact — designed for them to print, mark up, and hand to their electrician, septic contractor, mold assessor, or attorney.
Send the addendum draft to the buyers' attorney. It's the working draft, not a finished document — the attorney edits and formalizes it.
Keep the structured analysis (the chat output) in your file for the deal. It has the reasoning behind every number and recommendation.