Skip to content
PromptsBuddy
All prompts
CommunicationbeginnerClaudeChatGPTGemini

Explain it to someone who isn't an expert

Rewrites a technical explanation for a specific real person, keeps every fact intact, and flags where the simplification starts to become wrong.

MeghnaMeghna · Staff engineerAug 28, 2026v1.0
The prompt· 0/3 variables filled
~316 tokens
Rewrite this for someone who is not an expert.

WHAT I'D SAY TO A PEER:
{{EXPLANATION}}

WHO'S READING: {{READER}}
WHAT THEY NEED TO DO WITH IT: {{WHY}}

Give me:

**1. The version for them.** Same facts, no jargon that isn't defined on
first use, and ordered by what they need for their decision rather than by how
the system works. Lead with the part that affects them.

**2. What I can leave out.** The details that are true, that I am attached to,
and that do not change what they will do. Being explicit about this is what
keeps the explanation short.

**3. Where simplification becomes wrong.** Any place the plain-language version
is now slightly inaccurate, and whether that matters for this reader's decision.
This is the important section.

**4. The question they'll ask.** The most likely follow-up, and a one-sentence
answer ready.

Rules:
- Do not use an analogy unless the mechanism genuinely matches. A wrong analogy
  is worse than jargon because it feels understood.
- Do not remove numbers, caveats, or uncertainty. Simplify the language, not the
  facts.
- Do not condescend. Not an expert is not the same as not intelligent.
- If the explanation cannot be made honest at this reader's level, say so and
  say what they would need to know first.

Fill in the blanks

What goes in each blank

EXPLANATION
What you'd say to a peer — jargon and all.e.g. Paste your technical explanation, spec, or diagnosis.
READER
One specific person, not a category. What they already know matters more than their job title.e.g. My client's finance director — comfortable with spreadsheets, has never heard of an API.
WHY
What they need to do with it. This decides what can be left out.e.g. Decide whether to approve three more weeks of work.

Notes from people who use it

  • Name one real person in READER. 'Non-technical stakeholder' produces a generic rewrite; 'my client's finance director' produces a usable one.
  • Section 3 is what makes this safe to send — you know exactly which corner you cut.
  • Works on your own writing before a presentation, and on someone else's before you have to relay it.

Use this as a skill

A prompt is a skill with the serial numbers filed off. Install it once and your agent reaches for it on its own.

Paste this into ChatGPT, Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, or whatever you use:

Install the explain-it-to-someone-who-isnt-an-expert skill globally from https://promptsbuddy.com/prompts/explain-it-to-someone-who-isnt-an-expert/skill.md
Add to Cursor

.claude/skills/explain-it-to-someone-who-isnt-an-expert/SKILL.md

---
name: explain-it-to-someone-who-isnt-an-expert
description: "Rewrites a technical explanation for a specific real person, keeps every fact intact, and flags where the simplification starts to become wrong. Use when the user asks for help with communication tasks like explaining, communication, teaching."
license: CC-BY-4.0
metadata:
  source: https://promptsbuddy.com/prompts/explain-it-to-someone-who-isnt-an-expert
  author: "Meghna"
  version: "1.0"
---

# Explain it to someone who isn't an expert

Rewrites a technical explanation for a specific real person, keeps every fact intact, and flags where the simplification starts to become wrong.

## Inputs to collect first

Ask the user for anything below that they have not already given you. Do not
invent values for these.

- `EXPLANATION` — What you'd say to a peer — jargon and all. (e.g. Paste your technical explanation, spec, or diagnosis.)
- `READER` — One specific person, not a category. What they already know matters more than their job title. (e.g. My client's finance director — comfortable with spreadsheets, has never heard of an API.)
- `WHY` — What they need to do with it. This decides what can be left out. (e.g. Decide whether to approve three more weeks of work.)

## Instructions

Rewrite this for someone who is not an expert.

WHAT I'D SAY TO A PEER:
{{EXPLANATION}}

WHO'S READING: {{READER}}
WHAT THEY NEED TO DO WITH IT: {{WHY}}

Give me:

**1. The version for them.** Same facts, no jargon that isn't defined on
first use, and ordered by what they need for their decision rather than by how
the system works. Lead with the part that affects them.

**2. What I can leave out.** The details that are true, that I am attached to,
and that do not change what they will do. Being explicit about this is what
keeps the explanation short.

**3. Where simplification becomes wrong.** Any place the plain-language version
is now slightly inaccurate, and whether that matters for this reader's decision.
This is the important section.

**4. The question they'll ask.** The most likely follow-up, and a one-sentence
answer ready.

Rules:
- Do not use an analogy unless the mechanism genuinely matches. A wrong analogy
  is worse than jargon because it feels understood.
- Do not remove numbers, caveats, or uncertainty. Simplify the language, not the
  facts.
- Do not condescend. Not an expert is not the same as not intelligent.
- If the explanation cannot be made honest at this reader's level, say so and
  say what they would need to know first.

## Notes from people who use this

- Name one real person in READER. 'Non-technical stakeholder' produces a generic rewrite; 'my client's finance director' produces a usable one.
- Section 3 is what makes this safe to send — you know exactly which corner you cut.
- Works on your own writing before a presentation, and on someone else's before you have to relay it.

---

Explain it to someone who isn't an expert · by Meghna · v1.0
From PromptsBuddy — https://promptsbuddy.com/prompts/explain-it-to-someone-who-isnt-an-expert
Licensed CC BY 4.0.

Every prompt is also available at /prompts/explain-it-to-someone-who-isnt-an-expert/skill.md — see all install options.

The analogy trap

Bad analogies are the main failure mode of simplification, and they are worse than the jargon they replace: the reader now feels they understand something they do not, and will make decisions on that feeling. Requiring the mechanism to genuinely match kills most of them.

Knowing which corner you cut

Every simplification loses something. The difference between a good explanation and a misleading one is whether the person giving it knows what was lost. Section 3 makes that explicit, so you can answer honestly when the follow-up comes.

Try these next

WritingbeginnerStaff pick

Clarity rewrite that doesn't flatten your voice

A deliberately short editing prompt: improves readability without changing structure, meaning, or the way you sound. The one people paste most often.

ClaudeChatGPTGemini1 vars
RonyRony
Learningbeginner

Learn one hard idea properly in an hour

Builds a one-hour path through a concept you keep bouncing off: the minimum prerequisite, the idea itself, the two places your intuition will be wrong, and a test.

ClaudeChatGPTGemini3 vars
MeghnaMeghna