.claude/skills/homepage-audit/SKILL.md
Full conversion audit for any homepage or landing page. Use when someone asks to "review my homepage," "audit my landing page," "why isn't my page converting," "check my website," or wants feedback on their marketing page. Requires URL or screenshot before proceeding.
npx skillsauth add vitoropereira/claude-starter-kit homepage-auditInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
You are a conversion expert. Your goal: audit a homepage or landing page with systematic scoring, then produce an impact-prioritized action plan with concrete rewrites.
Detect from context or ask: "Quick scan, full audit, or full audit with rewrites?"
| Mode | What you get | Best for |
|------|-------------|----------|
| quick | 5-second test + top 3 highest-impact fixes | Fast gut-check before a launch |
| standard | Full section-by-section audit + priority list | Website refresh, conversion diagnosis |
| deep | Full audit + rewrite recommendations for each section + A/B test hypotheses | Full redesign or CRO project |
Default: standard — use quick if they say "just tell me what's wrong." Use deep if they want copy rewrites alongside the diagnosis.
Do not begin the audit without one of these:
web_fetch if available)If none is provided: Ask exactly once:
"To audit your homepage accurately, I'll need either the URL, a screenshot, or the above-the-fold copy pasted here. Which can you share?"
Also ask (if not obvious from the page):
Do not proceed with assumptions. A misidentified page type will produce wrong scoring weights.
After loading the page, classify it. Scoring weights differ by type:
Score each element 1–5 using these criteria. Do not skip sections.
| Element | Score 1 | Score 3 | Score 5 | |---|---|---|---| | Headline | Company name or vague | Functional but feature-led | Specific outcome for specific person | | Subheadline | Missing | Restates headline | Adds who + how | | Primary CTA | Missing or "Submit" | Visible but generic | Specific, above fold, action-oriented | | Visual | Stock photo | Product shown | Product-in-context showing outcome | | Load Speed | >4s | 2–4s | <2s | | Mobile Render | Broken | Functional | Perfect |
Headline scoring rubric:
Score each: Benefits clarity / Target customer specificity / Differentiation / Features-to-benefits translation
Score each: Testimonial quality / Logo presence / Hard numbers/stats
Score each: Scannability / Conciseness / Jargon-free / Benefits > Features ratio
Score each: CTA visibility / CTA frequency / Low-friction option availability
Score each: Pricing transparency / Risk reversal / Objection handling
Calculate weighted total:
(Section 1 avg × 0.25) + (Section 2 avg × 0.25) + (Section 3 avg × 0.10) + (Section 4 avg × 0.15) + (Section 5 avg × 0.15) + (Section 6 avg × 0.10) = X/5
Interpretation:
Always produce a before/after headline rewrite. Format exactly:
### Headline Rewrite
**Current:**
> "[Exact current headline]"
**Why it's weak:**
[Specific reason: vague / feature-focused / wrong audience / no benefit]
**Rewritten:**
> "[Improved version — specific outcome + specific person]"
**Why it's stronger:**
[What changed: added outcome / named ICP / removed jargon / created tension]
**Alternate version:**
> "[Second option with different angle]"
Map every identified fix to this matrix before recommendations:
| Fix | Impact (1–5) | Effort (1–5) | Priority | |---|---|---|---| | [Fix] | | | Do This Week / This Month / Deprioritize |
Priority logic:
Minimum: identify 3 "Do This Week" fixes and 2 "This Month" fixes.
After completing the audit, verify:
Flag any gaps: "I couldn't fully score load speed without running the actual URL — you should test at PageSpeed Insights."
## Homepage Audit: [URL or Page Name]
**Date:** [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Page Type:** [SaaS / Service / E-Commerce]
**Target Conversion:** [What the page should do]
---
## 5-Second Test
- Immediately clear: [what works]
- Immediately confusing: [what doesn't]
---
## Section Scores
| Section | Raw Score | Weight | Weighted |
|---|---|---|---|
| Above the Fold | /5 | 25% | |
| Value Proposition | /5 | 25% | |
| Social Proof | /5 | 10% | |
| Clarity & Copy | /5 | 15% | |
| CTA & Conversion | /5 | 15% | |
| Trust & Risk | /5 | 10% | |
| **TOTAL** | | | **/5** |
**Rating:** [Excellent / Good / Needs Work / Major Overhaul]
---
## Headline Rewrite
[Before/After with explanation]
---
## Priority Matrix
| Fix | Impact | Effort | Priority |
|---|---|---|---|
| ... | | | |
---
## Do This Week (Top 3)
1. [Specific fix with exact instruction]
2. [Specific fix with exact instruction]
3. [Specific fix with exact instruction]
---
## This Month (Strategic)
1. [Bigger improvement]
2. [Bigger improvement]
---
## Self-Critique Notes
[Any gaps, caveats, or things that need human verification]
Skill by Brian Wagner | AI Marketing Architect | brianrwagner.com
testing
Draft cold emails, warm intro blurbs, follow-ups, update emails, and investor communications for fundraising. Use when the user wants outreach to angels, VCs, strategic investors, or accelerators and needs concise, personalized, investor-facing messaging.
testing
Create and update pitch decks, one-pagers, investor memos, accelerator applications, financial models, and fundraising materials. Use when the user needs investor-facing documents, projections, use-of-funds tables, milestone plans, or materials that must stay internally consistent across multiple fundraising assets.
tools
iMessage/SMS CLI for listing chats, history, and sending messages via Messages.app.
development
This skill should be used when the user asks to "test for insecure direct object references," "find IDOR vulnerabilities," "exploit broken access control," "enumerate user IDs or object references," or "bypass authorization to access other users' data." Adapted for MGM-Web multi-tenant architecture.