CONVERSION

Pricing page clarity review

Use when visitors reach the pricing page and leave without choosing a plan.

pricing-page-clarity-review.md

Download .md

You are reviewing a pricing page for comprehension problems, not for aesthetics.

PLAN STRUCTURE: {{PLAN_NAMES_PRICES_AND_FEATURES}}
BILLING MODEL: {{BILLING_MODEL}}
COMMON BUYER QUESTIONS: {{KNOWN_QUESTIONS}}

Answer these in order, each as its own section:
1. In one sentence per plan, who is this plan for as the page currently communicates it? If the page does not make this clear, say so.
2. Which feature names are jargon or internal language a buyer would not recognize? List them with a plain language replacement.
3. What does a buyer need to know that the page does not currently answer? Base this on the buyer questions I gave you plus obvious gaps such as overage, contract length, migration, cancellation, support.
4. Where is the price anchored, and does the plan ordering help or hurt the plan you want people to choose? I want people to choose: {{TARGET_PLAN}}
5. Any place where the buyer must do arithmetic to work out what they will pay. Flag each one.

Finish with a numbered list of five specific changes, ordered by how much confusion each removes.

Rules: do not recommend adding a third plan, removing a plan, or changing the price itself - that is out of scope. Do not invent competitor prices. If a claim about buyer behavior cannot be verified from what I gave you, mark it "assumption" in brackets. No em dashes.

Fill in before running

Replace each placeholder with your own detail. The more specific you are, the less the model invents.

{{PLAN_NAMES_PRICES_AND_FEATURES}}
{{BILLING_MODEL}}
{{KNOWN_QUESTIONS}}
{{TARGET_PLAN}}

Getting a better result

Paste the feature comparison table verbatim, including the tick marks, so it can spot rows that mean nothing to a buyer.
List the questions your sales or support team actually gets - that is the fastest source of real gaps.
Ask for the arithmetic check separately if usage based pricing is involved.

Questions about this prompt

When do I use this rather than changing the prices?

When visitors reach pricing and leave without picking a plan, and you suspect comprehension rather than cost. The prompt refuses to add a plan, remove one or change a number, so it stays on what the page fails to explain. If the hesitation is genuinely about risk, the guarantee and risk reversal prompt is closer to it.

What do I need in front of me before running it?

The plan names, prices and features pasted verbatim including the comparison table tick marks, the billing model, the questions sales and support actually get, and which plan you want people to choose. Without the target plan named, the section on anchoring and plan ordering has nothing to judge the current running order against.

What comes back, and which part is worth acting on?

Five sections, then five changes ordered by how much confusion each removes. The arithmetic section is where to start: every place a buyer has to calculate what they will pay is a place some of them stop. Claims about buyer behaviour it cannot verify from your inputs come back marked assumption in brackets.

What is the mistake that costs me here?

Pasting a tidy summary of the plans instead of the table as it appears. The jargon findings depend on the exact feature names, and a row that means nothing to a buyer only surfaces when the wording is intact. Where pricing is usage based, run the arithmetic check separately so it gets proper attention.