A financial services firm is deploying Claude to provide investment information to retail investors. Legal requires that Claude never provide personalized investment advice (specific buy/sell recommendations for individual users). The product team wants Claude to be maximally helpful within this constraint. What system prompt design achieves this balance?

The optimal design threads the needle between usefulness and compliance: Claude provides genuine educational value (explaining ETFs, risk diversification, market mechanics, how to read a balance sheet) while maintaining a bright line against personalized advice ('Based on your situation, you should buy X'). The system prompt should define this distinction explicitly with examples, and provide Claude a clear, respectful redirect for out-of-scope requests ('For personalized investment advice tailored to your situation, please consult a licensed financial advisor'). Option A (refuse all investment questions) is unnecessarily restrictive — educational content is not regulated investment advice. Option C (disclaimer only) is legally insufficient in most jurisdictions; disclaimers don't transform regulated personalized advice into education. Option D (raw data without commentary) limits Claude's educational value; presenting financial data without explanation is often less helpful and doesn't clearly prevent Claude from making advisory statements.