Claude Skill

landing-page-cro-expert

Audits and rewrites landing pages, homepages, and sales pages to increase conversion — diagnosing why a page is not converting, rewriting headlines, hero copy and calls to action, and prioritizing which changes to test first. Use this when a page underperforms, when someone paste

LLM Mart · 0 points · 15 views 0 listing impressions 0 install-command copies
Virus-scanned Reviewed automatically before listing.

Full trust report

Download cbrock84-headcount-plugins_demand-generation_skills_landing-page-cro-expert-98d1c17.zip · 3 KB
Part of cbrock84/headcount — 160 skills

Install

skills CLI npx skills add https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount/tree/main/plugins/demand-generation/skills/landing-page-cro-expert
Claude Code claude plugin marketplace add https://llmmart.ai/marketplace.json && claude plugin install cbrock84-headcount@llmmart
Git git clone https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount.git

The skills CLI installs just this skill, for any of its supported agents. Claude Code installs the whole cbrock84/headcount collection as a plugin from our marketplace. Git is the plain clone.

Skill manifest

Landing page CRO

Diagnose before rewriting

A page converts when a visitor understands what this is, believes it will work for them, and has no unresolved objection at the moment they are asked to act. Failures are almost always one of those three, and the remedy differs entirely.

Read the page as a stranger who has five seconds. Then answer:

  • What is this, in the reader's words? If the hero requires domain knowledge to parse, nothing below it matters.
  • Who is it for? A page for everyone converts nobody. Specificity is a conversion tactic, not a marketing luxury.
  • Why this instead of the alternative — including doing nothing, which is the real competitor.
  • What is the single action? Multiple competing calls to action reliably reduce all of them.

The hero

Most of the outcome, decided in the space of a phone screen.

  • Headline states the outcome, not the category and not a slogan. "Close your books in two days, not two weeks" beats "Modern accounting infrastructure."
  • Subhead handles the obvious next question — usually how, or for whom.
  • One primary call to action, above the fold, with a label describing what happens next rather than "Submit" or "Get started."
  • Proof in the first screen. A logo row, a number, a named customer. Claims made with no evidence in sight are discounted wholesale.
  • Show the product. A screenshot of the real thing outperforms an abstract illustration for almost every software product.

Down the page

Order by the reader's questions, not by your feature list: what it does → why it is better than what they do now → proof → objections → price → act.

Every claim needs evidence near it. Every section should be removable — if cutting it changes nothing, cut it. Long pages are fine; padded pages are not.

Repeat the call to action at each natural decision point, always the same action.

Objections

List the real reasons people do not buy — cost, switching effort, trust, whether it works for their case, who else uses it — and answer each on the page. Objections not handled on the page are handled by leaving.

The strongest objection handling is specific: a migration guide, a named customer like them, a concrete guarantee.

Prioritizing tests

Rank by traffic × expected effect × confidence, and test structural things before cosmetic ones. Headline, offer framing, page order, and form length move conversion. Button color does not, and testing it consumes the traffic a real test needed.

Most pages cannot support many adequately powered tests. Spend them on the hero and the offer.

Scoring a page

Where a score is useful, rate each of these one to five with the criteria stated: clarity of what it is, specificity of who it is for, strength of the primary action, proof present and near claims, objections handled, and visual hierarchy supporting the path.

Publish the criteria with the score. A page scored 6/10 with no rubric produces an argument; the same score with the rubric produces a work list.

Sources

references/sources.md in this skill lists the outside authorities that settle the questions here — what each one is authoritative for, and what you may do with it. Check them before answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. Most are free to read and not free to reproduce; the use note on each is binding.

Never

  • Rewrite before diagnosing. Most pages that fail to convert are failing above the fold or off the page entirely, in the traffic.
  • Test a variant you cannot explain the hypothesis for. A win you cannot account for does not generalize.
  • Remove an objection from the page because it is uncomfortable. It does not leave the buyer's head, only your copy.

Return contract

Findings ordered by expected impact, each with the evidence, the specific fix, and effort. The one change to make first. And what you would leave alone — a CRO audit that flags everything has prioritized nothing.

Files (headcount)
  • references
    • sources.md 2.6 KB
      # Sources — `demand-generation:landing-page-cro-expert`
      
      <!-- Generated by scripts/build-sources.py from sources/*.toml. Do not edit. -->
      
      Check these before answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. The use note on each one is binding: most of what a professional cites is free to read and not free to reproduce.
      
      ## .com Disclosures: How to Make Effective Disclosures in Digital Advertising
      
      US Federal Trade Commission · US · public domain (US government) — quote freely
      
      <https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/com-disclosures-how-make-effective-disclosures-digital-advertising>
      
      **Authoritative for:** What 'clear and conspicuous' means on a screen — proximity, hyperlinks, scrolling, pop-ups, and space-constrained formats.
      
      ## ASA Statement on Statistical Significance and P-Values
      
      American Statistical Association · global · **read and cite only — copyrighted, do not reproduce**
      
      <https://www.amstat.org/asa/files/pdfs/p-valuestatement.pdf>
      
      **Authoritative for:** What a p-value does and does not mean. It settles the most common error in marketing experimentation, which is reading a test that crossed ninety-five percent as a result.
      
      ## Guidelines 05/2020 on consent under Regulation 2016/679
      
      European Data Protection Board · EU · free to use with attribution — credit the publisher
      
      <https://www.edpb.europa.eu/our-work-tools/our-documents/guidelines/guidelines-052020-consent-under-regulation-2016679_en>
      
      **Authoritative for:** Whether a consent interface is valid — cookie walls, scroll-as-consent, pre-ticked boxes, granularity and bundling. More decisive in practice than the regulation text, because this is what supervisory authorities apply.
      
      ## Guides Against Deceptive Pricing, 16 CFR 233
      
      US Federal Trade Commission · US · public domain (US government) — quote freely
      
      <https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-233>
      
      **Authoritative for:** Whether a 'was $X, now $Y', list-price, free-offer or percentage-off claim is lawful as presented.
      
      ## Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2
      
      World Wide Web Consortium · global · **read and cite only — copyrighted, do not reproduce**
      
      <https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/>
      
      **Authoritative for:** Whether a page, email or video is accessible. It is the criteria list that US Section 508, the EU's EN 301 549 and most enterprise procurement point at, so it settles any argument that reaches a buyer's accessibility requirement.
      
      ---
      
      Sources are maintained in `sources/` upstream, not here. If one is wrong, out of date, or missing, fix it there — this file is regenerated and an edit to it is lost.
      
  • SKILL.md 4.4 KB
    ---
    name: landing-page-cro-expert
    description: Audits and rewrites landing pages, homepages, and sales pages to increase conversion — diagnosing why a page is not converting, rewriting headlines, hero copy and calls to action, and prioritizing which changes to test first. Use this when a page underperforms, when someone pastes a URL or screenshot asking what is wrong, when writing a new page, or when deciding which conversion changes are worth testing.
    ---
    
    # Landing page CRO
    
    ## Diagnose before rewriting
    
    A page converts when a visitor understands what this is, believes it will work for them, and has no
    unresolved objection at the moment they are asked to act. Failures are almost always one of those
    three, and the remedy differs entirely.
    
    Read the page as a stranger who has five seconds. Then answer:
    
    - **What is this, in the reader's words?** If the hero requires domain knowledge to parse, nothing
      below it matters.
    - **Who is it for?** A page for everyone converts nobody. Specificity is a conversion tactic, not a
      marketing luxury.
    - **Why this instead of the alternative** — including doing nothing, which is the real competitor.
    - **What is the single action?** Multiple competing calls to action reliably reduce all of them.
    
    ## The hero
    
    Most of the outcome, decided in the space of a phone screen.
    
    - **Headline states the outcome**, not the category and not a slogan. "Close your books in two days,
      not two weeks" beats "Modern accounting infrastructure."
    - **Subhead handles the obvious next question** — usually how, or for whom.
    - **One primary call to action**, above the fold, with a label describing what happens next rather
      than "Submit" or "Get started."
    - **Proof in the first screen.** A logo row, a number, a named customer. Claims made with no
      evidence in sight are discounted wholesale.
    - **Show the product.** A screenshot of the real thing outperforms an abstract illustration for
      almost every software product.
    
    ## Down the page
    
    Order by the reader's questions, not by your feature list: what it does → why it is better than what
    they do now → proof → objections → price → act.
    
    Every claim needs evidence near it. Every section should be removable — if cutting it changes
    nothing, cut it. Long pages are fine; padded pages are not.
    
    Repeat the call to action at each natural decision point, always the same action.
    
    ## Objections
    
    List the real reasons people do not buy — cost, switching effort, trust, whether it works for their
    case, who else uses it — and answer each on the page. Objections not handled on the page are handled
    by leaving.
    
    The strongest objection handling is specific: a migration guide, a named customer like them, a
    concrete guarantee.
    
    ## Prioritizing tests
    
    Rank by **traffic × expected effect × confidence**, and test structural things before cosmetic ones.
    Headline, offer framing, page order, and form length move conversion. Button color does not, and
    testing it consumes the traffic a real test needed.
    
    Most pages cannot support many adequately powered tests. Spend them on the hero and the offer.
    
    ## Scoring a page
    
    Where a score is useful, rate each of these one to five with the criteria stated: clarity of what it
    is, specificity of who it is for, strength of the primary action, proof present and near claims,
    objections handled, and visual hierarchy supporting the path.
    
    Publish the criteria with the score. A page scored 6/10 with no rubric produces an argument; the
    same score with the rubric produces a work list.
    
    ## Sources
    
    `references/sources.md` in this skill lists the outside authorities that settle the questions
    here — what each one is authoritative for, and what you may do with it. Check them before
    answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. Most are free to read and not free
    to reproduce; the use note on each is binding.
    
    ## Never
    
    - Rewrite before diagnosing. Most pages that fail to convert are failing above the fold or off the page entirely, in the traffic.
    - Test a variant you cannot explain the hypothesis for. A win you cannot account for does not generalize.
    - Remove an objection from the page because it is uncomfortable. It does not leave the buyer's head, only your copy.
    
    ## Return contract
    
    Findings ordered by expected impact, each with the evidence, the specific fix, and effort. The one
    change to make first. And what you would leave alone — a CRO audit that flags everything has
    prioritized nothing.
    

Comments (0)

Sign in to join the conversation.

No comments yet.

Reviews (0)

No reviews yet.

Related