CONVERSION

Trust signal audit

Use when a page has plenty of logos and badges but the proof is not doing any work.

trust-signal-audit.md

Download .md

You are auditing the trust and proof elements on a page. Assume the visitor is skeptical and has not heard of us.

PAGE: {{PAGE_URL_OR_DESCRIPTION}}
TRUST ELEMENTS PRESENT: {{LIST_OF_LOGOS_TESTIMONIALS_BADGES_STATS_GUARANTEES}}
KEY OBJECTIONS WE KNOW ABOUT: {{OBJECTIONS}}
DECISION POINTS ON THE PAGE: {{WHERE_THE_CTAS_ARE}}

For each trust element, produce a row: Element | What doubt it is meant to answer | Does it actually answer that doubt (Yes/Partly/No) | Placement relative to the nearest decision point | Recommendation (keep, move, strengthen, remove).

Then answer:
- Which known objection currently has no proof against it at all?
- Which elements are generic and would be equally true of any competitor?
- Which testimonial or stat would be far stronger with one added detail, and what detail?

Constraints: do not invent testimonials, customer names, or statistics. If a stat has no source, mark it "unsourced - verify before use" rather than restating it as fact. Do not recommend adding security badges unless the objection list contains a security or payment concern. No em dashes, and do not end with a summary paragraph repeating the table.

Fill in before running

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

{{PAGE_URL_OR_DESCRIPTION}}
{{LIST_OF_LOGOS_TESTIMONIALS_BADGES_STATS_GUARANTEES}}
{{OBJECTIONS}}
{{WHERE_THE_CTAS_ARE}}

Getting a better result

Pair every objection with the exact page position where it first occurs to the visitor.
Testimonials that name a role and a result outperform ones that name only a company.
Run it again after the changes and check that no objection is left with a No row.

Questions about this prompt

When do I audit the proof rather than add more of it?

When the page already carries logos, badges and testimonials and the instinct is to add another row. This asks what doubt each element answers and whether it sits anywhere near a decision point. Adding proof without knowing which objection it addresses is how a page ends up with six badges and an unanswered pricing fear.

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

Every trust element listed out, the objections you know about, and where the calls to action sit on the page. Pair each objection with the point where the visitor first has it, since placement relative to the nearest decision point is half of what gets judged. It will not invent testimonials or numbers, so gaps stay visible.

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

A row per element ending in keep, move, strengthen or remove, then three answers. The objection with no proof against it at all is the line to act on, because it names work that does not exist yet rather than work to tidy. The generic elements question usually catches most of the logo strip.

What is the mistake that costs me here?

Reading a stat marked unsourced, verify before use as a minor caveat. It means nobody can say where the number came from, and publishing it anyway is a risk you are taking knowingly. Re-run the audit after the changes and check that no objection is left with a No row, which is the only real completion test.