Methodology — v.2026.05 10-point clarity grid Async, no calls

MAudit framework

How we score your landing page.

Every audit ClawniLab delivers is built on the same 10-point grid. Same questions, same scoring, same friction map structure. No vibes-based feedback. No "I think this could be stronger." Just a grid, a score, and a ranked list of fixes.

The 10-point clarity grid

Each criterion scores 0–10. Total clarity score is /100. Anything under 70 means a buyer is leaving the page confused.

01

Hero clarity

Within 5 seconds a first-time visitor can say what the product is, for whom, and what it does.

SCORED ON · headline + sub-headline naming product, audience, outcome · no metaphor
  • 10/10 — headline + sub-headline name the product category, the audience and the outcome in ≤12 + ≤25 words, no metaphor.
  • 5/10 — product category is clear but audience or outcome is vague or implied.
  • 0/10 — headline is a slogan/metaphor with no product noun; visitor must scroll to understand the offer.
02

Promise

The page states one specific, believable outcome that changes for the user.

SCORED ON · one concrete outcome (number, time, artefact) · stated once, repeated consistently
  • 10/10 — one concrete outcome, stated in the hero and repeated consistently.
  • 5/10 — an outcome is implied but not quantified, or stated only once with no reinforcement.
  • 0/10 — no outcome — only features or adjectives ("powerful", "all-in-one").
03

CTA

One primary action is visible above the fold, verb-led, low-friction, and says what happens next.

SCORED ON · single primary CTA · specific verb + object · expectation set
  • 10/10 — single primary CTA above the fold, specific verb + object, expectation set ("Start free — no card, 2 min"); secondary CTA visually subordinate.
  • 5/10 — a clear CTA exists above the fold but with a generic verb or no expectation set.
  • 0/10 — no CTA above the fold, or ≥3 competing CTAs with generic labels.
04

Proof

The page shows evidence that someone else already got the promise.

SCORED ON · named, checkable proof (customer + role, number + source, logo, case study) · placement
  • 10/10 — ≥3 named, checkable proof elements placed next to the promise.
  • 5/10 — named proof exists but sits far from the promise, or fewer than 3 elements.
  • 0/10 — no proof, or only anonymous claims ("Trusted by thousands").
05

Audience

The page names who it is for and speaks in that person's words.

SCORED ON · audience named in the hero · mirrored in examples, pricing, proof
  • 10/10 — one audience named in the hero, mirrored consistently in examples, pricing and proof.
  • 5/10 — an audience is named but not mirrored elsewhere, or the page names several audiences at once.
  • 0/10 — "for everyone" or no audience at all.
06

Objections

The page answers the main reasons not to buy: price, effort, risk, trust, switching cost.

SCORED ON · objection coverage · visibility · directness
  • 10/10 — ≥3 objections handled visibly (pricing shown, guarantee/refund, integration/migration path, security/legal, FAQ).
  • 5/10 — 1–2 objections handled, or handled but buried (FAQ only, below the fold).
  • 0/10 — none handled; visitor must email to learn price or commitment.
07

Readability

The page can be scanned: headings alone tell the story, paragraphs are short, words are plain.

SCORED ON · heading structure · sentence length · plain language
  • 10/10 — reading only H1/H2/H3 gives the full pitch; sentences ≤20 words; no jargon.
  • 5/10 — headings are present but generic/filler ("…and so much more!"), or some jargon.
  • 0/10 — walls of text, buzzword headings, meaning hidden in paragraphs.
08

Perceived speed

The page feels instant: content appears fast, nothing jumps, nothing interrupts before the visitor reads.

SCORED ON · measured HTTP time · page weight · absence of interstitials
  • 10/10 — HTML answers in <0.8s, page weight <1.5MB, no interstitial/popup, no layout shift.
  • 5/10 — HTML answers in 0.8–3s or page weight 1.5–5MB, no interstitial.
  • 0/10 — HTML >3s or >5MB, or a popup/interstitial covers the hero.
09

Consistency

One message, one voice, one visual system from hero to footer; CTA matches promise; prices match claims.

SCORED ON · same product name, outcome, audience and tone everywhere · CTA matches promise
  • 10/10 — no contradiction anywhere on the page — same claims, same audience, same tone.
  • 5/10 — a minor drift (e.g. the audience list changes between the hero and a lower section).
  • 0/10 — conflicting claims (two prices, two audiences, "free" vs paywall).
10

Next step

After the CTA, the visitor knows exactly what happens and the path has no friction.

SCORED ON · stated destination · expectation set (time, price, what they receive)
  • 10/10 — CTA leads to one stated action with the expectation set right next to it.
  • 5/10 — the destination is implied and low-friction, but no expectation copy sits next to the CTA.
  • 0/10 — dead end — generic contact form, "we'll get back to you", no destination stated.

What a finished score looks like

Anonymized example from a Series A B2B SaaS landing page (workflow automation category).

#CriterionScoreOne-line note
01Hero clarity6 / 10Hero says "automate your work" — too generic for a Series A page
02Promise4 / 10No numbers. "Save time", "boost productivity" — verifiable claims missing
03CTA8 / 10"Start free" CTA aligned with "try free" hero promise — clean
04Proof5 / 10Logos exist but below fold; no customer quote in first viewport
05Audience7 / 104-field signup with SSO option — acceptable for free tier
06Objections6 / 10Pricing sits above use cases — order optimized for analyst, not buyer
07Readability3 / 10"Why this vs. Zapier?" answered only in FAQ — too late for first scan
08Perceived speed7 / 10Strong subheadings; copy paragraphs trail off into walls
09Consistency5 / 10Hero CTA pushed under fold on 390px; second CTA also off-screen
10Next step6 / 10Free signup clear; what happens after signup is invisible from page
Total clarity score57 / 100Below 70 threshold — buyers leave confused on key dimensions

What you get back in 48h

Every audit ships the same six pieces. No add-ons, no upsells, no "premium tier."

1. Clarity scorecard

The 10-point grid scored on your page, with one-line notes on each criterion (like the example above).

2. Friction map

The 3–5 specific issues costing you conversions, ranked by impact and fix-effort.

3. Hero rewrite example

A drop-in hero alternative showing the clearer direction. Not a full rewrite — a directional sample.

4. Trust gap analysis

What's missing that paying customers expect to see — by ICP segment.

5. Implementation notes

Dev-ready notes so your team can ship the fixes in days, not weeks.

6. Async Q&A round

One round of clarification questions over email or marketplace messages, within 7 days of delivery.

What this audit is not

Setting expectations matters more than overselling.

  • /01
    Not a full redesign. No mockups, no Figma files, no visual identity work. We tell you what to fix; your team implements.
  • /02
    Not a copywriting service. One hero rewrite example is included. Full-page rewrites are a separate engagement.
  • /03
    Not an SEO audit. We don't score keyword targeting, schema, or link profile. Talk to an SEO specialist for those.
  • /04
    Not a positioning workshop. If your offer or ICP isn't defined yet, an audit won't fix that. Start with positioning, then audit.
  • /05
    Not consulting on retainer. Flat-fee, one-shot deliverable. No follow-on retainers, no monthly check-ins.

Ready for your scorecard?

Send us the URL. Get the audit in 48h. One flat price.

Get my clarity audit →