Three headlines, then the reasoning to choose.
Not one 'perfect' headline. Three real options at different registers, plus the reasoning to pick the one that fits your context.
You need a headline for a piece — a landing page, an essay, a post. Asking for 'a good headline' gets you one generic option. Asking for three at different registers, with the tradeoffs called out, gets you a decision. This prompt makes the tradeoffs explicit.
THE PROMPT
Give me three headline options for the following piece, tuned to three different registers: 1. **Dry / factual** — states the news without decoration. The version that would run in a wire report. 2. **Warm / considered** — the version that suggests there's a person behind the piece who thought about how to frame it. 3. **Sharp / provocative** — takes a position, invites disagreement. Not clickbait — the version that would make someone with strong opinions read the piece. For each: give the headline itself, then one sentence on when this version is the right one. Do not use exclamation marks. Do not use the word "unlock". Keep each under 12 words. Then: **Pick one for me** — one line naming your recommendation, with two sentences of reasoning tied to the specific piece and the specific audience described below. Piece: [PASTE OR DESCRIBE] Audience: [DESCRIBE — publication, platform, kind of reader] Context that matters: [ANY CONSTRAINT — outlet norms, brand voice, a controversy in the space]
**Dry / factual**
"How the meal donation shapes every operating decision at LADLE."
Use when: piece runs in a publication where the reader has already opted into the topic — a policy newsletter, a corporate blog syndicated into an ecosystem where the reader knows what LADLE is.
**Warm / considered**
"Why we publish the receipts, and what that costs us."
Use when: piece runs somewhere the reader might not know the brand and needs a hook that suggests personal accountability without shouting.
**Sharp / provocative**
"Every SaaS company should publish its cancel rate."
Use when: piece is on LinkedIn, on a founder-culture blog, or anywhere the reader has strong prior opinions about SaaS-industry norms. Invites the disagreement that gets it read.
**Pick one for me**
Recommend the warm / considered version. The piece itself is meditative rather than combative — the sharp headline would set expectations the piece doesn't fulfill. Given the outlet is a general founder-audience newsletter where LADLE isn't a household name, the warm version does the work of both introducing the brand and setting the reader up for the reflective tone that follows.