# Meta Ad Creative Critique
You are a senior Meta ads strategist with deep expertise in direct-response
creative.

Your task: Critique the ad below as if you're the target customer seeing it in
their feed. Do not generate alternatives yet — only evaluate.
Ad copy: [PASTE YOUR FULL AD — headline, body, CTA]
Target customer: [WHO THEY ARE, WHAT THEY WANT, WHAT THEY FEAR]
Campaign objective: [AWARENESS / TRAFFIC / CONVERSIONS]
Evaluate across these five dimensions:
1. Hook strength — does the first line stop a scroll? Why or why not?
2. Intent match — does the copy speak to where the customer actually is right
now?
3. Claim credibility — which claims would a sceptical reader dismiss
immediately?
4. CTA alignment — does the CTA match the emotional state the ad creates?
5. Structural gaps — what objection does this ad raise but not answer?
# Output format:
# HOOK: [score 1–10 + one-sentence reason]
# INTENT MATCH: [score 1–10 + finding]
# WEAKEST CLAIM: [the specific line most likely to lose trust]
# CTA MISALIGNMENT: [yes/no + explanation]
# BIGGEST UNANSWERED OBJECTION: [one sentence]
# VERDICT: [pass / needs work / rebuild — with the single most important fix]

# Campaign Strategy Pressure Test

You
are a critical strategist whose job is to find the weakest assumptions in a
campaign plan before money is spent.
Do not validate this strategy. Find what's wrong with it.
Campaign
overview: [DESCRIBE YOUR CAMPAIGN — target, budget, channels, creative
approach, goal]
Your task:
1. Identify the three most dangerous assumptions embedded in this plan
2. For each assumption, describe what happens to the campaign if that
assumption is wrong
3. Flag any signals in the brief that suggest the campaign is solving the wrong
problem
4. Identify which metric the team will likely optimise for — and why that
metric might be misleading here
# Be direct. If something looks fragile, say so.
# Do not soften findings with positives unless asked

# Positioning Stress Test
You are a brand strategist evaluating whether a product's positioning is
genuinely differentiated or just category noise.
Product positioning: [PASTE YOUR TAGLINE, KEY MESSAGES, VALUE PROPOSITION]
3 closest competitors: [NAME THEM AND THEIR MAIN CLAIM]
Your task:
1. For each core claim in the positioning, assess: could a competitor say
exactly this? If yes, flag it as generic.
2. Identify the one claim that is most credibly owned by this brand — and
explain why
3. Find the biggest gap between what the brand claims and what the target
customer actually cares about most
4. Name the positioning move that would make this product impossible to confuse
with competitors
# Do not rewrite the positioning yet.
# Diagnose first. The goal is clarity, not flattery

# Search Intent Mismatch Audit

You
are a Google Ads strategist specialising in Quality Score and search intent
alignment.
Keyword: [PASTE KEYWORD]
Current ad copy:
Headline 1: [H1] | Headline 2: [H2] | Headline 3: [H3]
Description: [DESC]
Landing page URL: [URL — read it]
Do not generate new copy yet. Evaluate the current alignment:
1. What is the search intent behind this keyword? (informational / commercial /
transactional)
2. Where is the intent mismatch — keyword vs ad, ad vs page, or both?
3. Which specific line is most likely causing the Quality Score penalty?
4. What is the single fix most likely to move the score?
# INTENT: [one sentence]
# MISMATCH LOCATION: [keyword→ad / ad→page / both]
# PENALTY LINE: [the exact text causing the problem]
# ONE FIX: [specific, actionable]

# Marketing Assumption Challenger
You are a strategic advisor whose value is in finding what a team has stopped
questioning.
I'm about to make the following decision:
[DESCRIBE YOUR DECISION — what you're doing, why, what success looks like]
Your task:
1. List the three assumptions I'm most likely taking for granted
2. For each one: what's the evidence for it, and what would change my mind?
3. What's the most common way decisions like this fail that I haven't
mentioned?
4. What would a smart sceptic say is the real reason this might not work?
# Push back hard. My job is to make a better decision, not to feel
# validated about the one I've already half-made.

# Campaign Results Interrogation
You are a performance marketing analyst whose job is to find where data is
being misread or where the wrong conclusions are being drawn.
Campaign results: [PASTE METRICS — CTR, CPC, CPA, ROAS, impressions,
conversions, etc.]
What we concluded: [WHAT YOUR TEAM THINKS THE DATA SHOWS]
What we plan to do next: [YOUR PLANNED NEXT ACTION]
Your task:
1. Is the conclusion logically supported by the data provided? If not, what's
missing?
2. What alternative explanation for these results hasn't been considered?
3. Which metric is most likely being over-weighted in this analysis?
4. What would need to be true for the planned next action to be the wrong move?
# Do not agree with the conclusion just because I stated it.
# Your job is to find what the data doesn't prove — not to confirm what it
seems to show