Landing ux review
AI-agent skills for marketers, growth & business analysts — competitor teardowns, funnel audits, pricing analysis & more. 12 ready-to-use Agent Skills.
npx -y skills add fjilvvi/growthlens --skill landing-ux-reviewAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 1 stars1 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Conversion-focused UX review of a landing page — above-the-fold clarity, visual hierarchy, copy, CTA, trust, friction, mobile, and load — scored section by section with prioritized fixes. Use when the user shares a landing page URL or screenshot and asks "why isn't this converting", "review this landing page", "audit the UX", "improve this page", or "give me CRO feedback".
The file declares its own license as MIT. That is the author’s claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.
SKILL.md
3.9 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Landing Page UX Review
A structured, conversion-oriented critique of a single landing page — what to fix first to lift conversion.
What it does
Reviews one landing page against a conversion-UX rubric and returns a scored, section-by-section critique with a prioritized fix list. It focuses on the decisions that move conversion — clarity, hierarchy, trust, and friction — not on subjective aesthetics.
When to use this skill
- "Why isn't this landing page converting? <url>"
- "Review the UX / do a CRO review of this page."
- "Improve this page" (with a URL or screenshot).
- Pre-launch check on a new landing or sales page.
Inputs needed
- Required: the page URL, or screenshots (desktop and ideally mobile).
- Helpful: the page's single goal (the one action), the traffic source, and the target audience — UX is only "good" relative to a goal and a visitor.
- If the goal isn't obvious, ask: "What's the one action this page should drive?"
Method
Score each area 1–5 and note the highest-leverage issue. Use the LIFT-style levers (value proposition, clarity, relevance, urgency, anxiety, distraction).
- Above the fold — within 5 seconds: is it clear what this is, who it's for, and what to do? Is the primary CTA visible without scrolling?
- Value proposition & clarity — headline strength, benefit vs feature framing, jargon, reading ease.
- Visual hierarchy — does the eye flow to the headline → proof → CTA? Are there competing focal points?
- Relevance / message-match — does the page match the promise of the ad, email, or search query that sent the visitor?
- Call to action — wording (action + value), prominence, repetition, contrast, and whether there's one primary action or many competing ones.
- Trust & proof — testimonials, logos, numbers, guarantees, security — and whether they appear near the decision point.
- Friction & anxiety — form length, required fields, unclear pricing, missing answers to obvious objections, risk reducers.
- Distraction — nav, links, and elements that pull away from the goal.
- Mobile & performance — layout on mobile, tap targets, apparent load speed, anything that breaks the fold on small screens.
Output format
# Landing UX Review — <page>
## TL;DR
- Overall __/5. The one change that will move conversion most.
## Page goal & visitor
- Primary action: · Traffic source: · Audience:
## Scorecard
| Area | Score /5 | Key issue |
|------|----------|-----------|
| Above the fold | | |
| Value prop & clarity | | |
| Visual hierarchy | | |
| Message-match | | |
| Call to action | | |
| Trust & proof | | |
| Friction & anxiety | | |
| Distraction | | |
| Mobile & performance | | |
## Prioritized fixes
| # | Fix | Area | Why it matters | Impact | Effort |
|---|-----|------|----------------|--------|--------|
## Quick wins (ship today)
- 3 changes that are fast and high-confidence.
Quality bar
- Tie every critique to a conversion lever and the page's stated goal.
- Reference specific page elements ("the second-fold CTA reads 'Submit'"), not vague impressions.
- Don't invent traffic, bounce, or conversion numbers.
- Separate high-confidence issues from "test this" hypotheses.
Common mistakes to avoid
- Aesthetic opinions ("I'd use a different blue") over conversion impact.
- A flat list of issues with no prioritization.
- Reviewing without knowing the page's one goal.