Marketing conversion flow dark pattern review
Skill Raishin/vanguard-frontier-agentic/skills/marketing/marketing-conversion-flow-dark-pattern-review
Curated marketplace of AI skills, agents, and rules for cloud, zero-trust, and compliance-aware engineering - works with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Copilot, and more.
npx -y skills add Raishin/vanguard-frontier-agentic --skill marketing-conversion-flow-dark-pattern-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
- 18 stars18 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
Use this skill when reviewing marketing conversion flow specifications — subscription sign-up, upsell interstitial, free-trial enrollment, and cancellation path — for dark-pattern practices that invalidate consent or constitute unfair or deceptive acts under FTC Section 5 and state privacy laws. Trigger when a user provides a UX flow specification including step-by-step page descriptions, annotated wireframes, CTA labels, pre-checked options, visual weight of accept vs decline paths, countdown timer specs, or cancellation flow step counts. Scope is limited to marketing conversion flows; consent banner review is handled by a separate skill.
SKILL.md
4.9 KB, 819 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Marketing Conversion Flow Dark-Pattern Review
Purpose
This skill reviews marketing conversion flow specifications — subscription sign-up, upsell interstitials, free-trial enrollment, and cancellation paths — for dark-pattern practices that invalidate consent or constitute unfair or deceptive acts under FTC Section 5, the FTC Negative Option Rule (ROSCA), the CPRA statutory dark-pattern definition (§ 1798.140(l)), and EU AI Act Article 5(1)(b). Dark patterns in conversion flows are a distinct and high-priority regulatory surface: pre-checked auto-renew boxes, asymmetric cancel vs. subscribe step counts, artificial countdown timers, and visually suppressed decline paths have drawn FTC enforcement, FTC rules with click-to-cancel mandates, and CPRA enforcement advisories. This skill works from a sanitized UX flow specification or annotated wireframe only. It does not review consent banners — that is the domain of marketing-consent-data-collection-review.
Lean operating rules
- Treat a free-trial or subscription enrollment flow that pre-checks "auto-renew at full price" (or any material recurring-charge term) as HIGH — pre-checked consent for a recurring financial commitment is prohibited under the FTC Negative Option Rule and invalidates consent under CPRA § 1798.140(l).
- Treat any cancellation path that requires more steps than the enrollment path, or that interposes save-offers between the cancel intent and the cancel confirmation without a direct-cancel alternative, as HIGH — the FTC Negative Option Rule and ROSCA require cancellation to be at least as easy as enrollment.
- Treat an artificial countdown timer applied to an offer with no real deadline as HIGH — it creates false urgency, a deceptive act under FTC Act Section 5.
- Treat visual suppression of the decline path (smaller font, lower contrast, grey-out, positioning below the fold, or absence of a visible "no thanks" option) as HIGH when paired with a visually dominant accept CTA — asymmetric visual weight subverts user autonomy under CPRA § 1798.140(l) and constitutes a deceptive format under FTC Section 5.
- Treat upsell interstitials that make the "continue without upgrade" option absent, invisible, or materially harder to reach than the upgrade CTA as HIGH — the absence of a clear decline path on a mandatory interstitial eliminates meaningful consent.
- Treat a subscription sign-up flow in which material price, renewal date, and cancellation method are not disclosed clearly and conspicuously before billing information is collected as HIGH — ROSCA requires pre-billing disclosure of all material terms.
- Flag "confirm-shaming" CTA copy (e.g. "No thanks, I don't want to save money") as MEDIUM — it applies social pressure but may not alone constitute an unfair act; combined with visual suppression it escalates.
- Flag any save-offer sequence on a cancellation path that does not offer a direct cancel option at each step as MEDIUM — save offers are permissible but must not be the only route.
- Flag countdown timers whose real deadline is authenticated by server state (session-scoped) as LOW — distinguish from artificial timers which are HIGH.
- Do not recommend removing a conversion step without naming the revenue or data-collection impact and an FTC-compliant alternative.
- Label every finding with evidence basis: flow specification provided, wireframe provided, documentation-based, or inference from missing element.
References
Load these only when needed:
- Workflow and output contract — use when executing the full review or formatting the final answer.
Response minimum
Return, at minimum:
- Pre-checked consent assessment (recurring-charge terms, auto-renew)
- Cancellation path symmetry assessment (step count vs. enrollment path)
- Countdown timer authenticity assessment
- Visual weight and decline-path accessibility assessment
- Upsell interstitial consent assessment
- Material-term pre-billing disclosure assessment
- Confirm-shaming CTA assessment
- Severity-labelled finding list (critical / high / medium / low)
- Safe next actions
What ships with it: 2 files
9.3 KB alongside SKILL.md
references/
- workflow-and-output.md7.8 KB
- metadata.json1.6 KB