landing-page-and-conversion-design

name	landing-page-and-conversion-design
description	Use when designing or restructuring a landing, marketing, campaign, waitlist, signup, or product-home page around one honest conversion goal, value proposition, objections, proof, CTA hierarchy, and closing ask. Use trust-credibility-and-social-proof for proof assets and navigation-and-information-architecture for structure.
metadata	{"portable":true,"category":"14-conversion-and-web-page-patterns","compatible_with":["claude-code","codex"]}

Landing Page & Conversion Design

Acknowledgement: Shared by Peter Bamuhigire, techguypeter.com.

A landing page has one job: move a specific visitor to take one specific action, and earn that action honestly. This skill gives you the section-by-section architecture and the conversion-credibility craft that makes the page convert because it is clear and trustworthy — never because it tricked someone. The doctrine's Mission applies in full: a page that opens in Inter on an indigo gradient with a three-icon feature row tells the visitor no one authored it. Conversion is downstream of that judgement.

Use When

• You are building or rebuilding a landing / marketing / product-home / campaign / waitlist page whose success is measured by one conversion (signup, trial, demo, purchase, subscribe).
• A page exists but underperforms and you need to diagnose why the visitor doesn't act — unclear value prop, weak proof, buried CTA, friction, or a credibility gap.
• A growth/marketing team hands you copy and asks for the page structure and CTA hierarchy.
• You are asked to "make it convert" and your instinct (or someone else's) is reaching for countdown timers, fake "3 people are viewing this," or a pre-checked upsell — STOP and use the anti-dark-pattern rules here instead.

Do Not Use When

• The page is a product UI (dashboard, app screen, settings) not a marketing page — use practical-ui-design / webapp-gui-design.
• The task is the trust/proof section in isolation — go to trust-credibility-and-social-proof (P1, group 04). This skill composes that section into the whole page; that skill details the testimonial/security-cue catalog.
• The task is a multi-step checkout or signup flow — use ecommerce-and-checkout-ux (P1, group 06) or onboarding-and-first-run-design (P1, group 04). A landing page ends at the CTA; those skills own what happens after the click.
• You only need the copy/microcopy for buttons and headlines — use 10-content-design-and-ux-writing/ux-writing-and-microcopy for wording, then return here for placement and hierarchy.

Required Inputs

Input	Source	Required?	Evidence
Audience, job, offer, conversion, and post-click outcome	Product/marketing owner	yes	Approved conversion brief
Proof, objections, claims, pricing, and constraints	Research, sales, legal, and product	yes	Verified evidence inventory
Brand, traffic source, device, analytics, and accessibility needs	Delivery owners	yes	Channel and measurement plan

• The ONE action. Exactly one primary conversion goal for the page. If there are two equally-weighted goals, the page has none — split it or rank them. Write it down first.
• The audience and their stage. Cold (never heard of you) vs warm (clicked an ad they already understand) changes how much proof and education the page must carry above the fold.
• The real value proposition — the genuine one-sentence answer to "why should this specific person care, in their words, not yours." Not a tagline; the concrete outcome. You cannot design a hero around a slogan you haven't sharpened (doctrine: design around real content, never lorem).
• Real proof you are allowed to use — named customers, real quotes with attribution, true metrics, genuine logos/certifications. If proof is thin, the page must be honest about it (see conversion-credibility), not fabricate it.

0. Run the pre-flight, then commit the page's ONE distinctive idea

Run 04-web-and-ui-design/distinctive-by-design first — it gates the build. A landing page is the single highest-stakes surface for the Mission: it is where the convergent SaaS template (Inter / indigo gradient / glass cards / centred hero / three-feature-icon row) is most reflexive and most damaging. Commit ONE authored organising idea for the page (a signature display face carrying the headline, an off-centre hero, a recurring motif, an authored image POV) per doctrine/design-doctrine.md §0 and pairing-principles.md. State it before any markup.

1. Lock the single conversion goal and the message match

• Name the one primary action. Every section below either moves the visitor toward it or earns the right to ask. Secondary actions (a "learn more", a docs link) are visually subordinate — a text link, never a second equal-weight button competing with the primary CTA.
• Message match: the hero headline must echo the promise of whatever brought the visitor here (the ad, the email subject, the search). A mismatch between the click's promise and the page's first line is the largest, most common conversion leak.

2. Build the section spine (see references/landing-anatomy.md)

Order is deliberate — it answers the visitor's questions in the sequence they ask them:

1. Hero — value prop headline + supporting subhead + primary CTA + one credibility anchor (a real proof token: named logo strip, a rating, a usage number). Answers "what is this and is it for me?" in one screen.
2. Value proposition / outcome — the concrete transformation, framed as the visitor's outcome, not your feature list. Answers "what do I get?"
3. How it works / the mechanism — enough to make the promise believable. Answers "how?"
4. Social proof — testimonials with attribution, case numbers, logos, ratings. Composed from trust-credibility-and-social-proof. Answers "do people like me trust this?"
5. Objection handling — address the top 2–3 real reasons this visitor hesitates (price, effort, risk, lock-in). A short FAQ or a comparison. Answers "what's the catch?"
6. Closing CTA — restate the value and the ask, with the same primary action. Answers "okay — how do I start?"

Not every page needs all six, but the sequence (claim → outcome → believability → proof → objections → ask) is the load-bearing logic. Reorder only with a stated reason.

3. Design the CTA hierarchy

• One primary CTA, repeated (hero + closing, sometimes a sticky bar) but visually identical every time — same label, same weight, same colour role. Repetition without variation; the visitor learns the button.
• Real button copy stating the value, not the mechanic: "Start my free trial" / "Get the audit" — not "Submit" / "Click here." (Route wording through ux-writing-and-microcopy.)
• One focal point per screen. The primary CTA is the brightest, highest-contrast element in its viewport. If a secondary action is equally loud, demote it (distinctive-by-design §3 — one clear focal point, designed eye-path).
• Minimise the ask. The fewest fields the conversion truly needs. Every extra field is friction; defer the rest to after the click (see onboarding-and-first-run-design).

4. Earn the click — conversion-credibility, not coercion (see references/conversion-credibility.md)

This is the heart of the skill and the doctrine's ethics line. Persuasion is legitimate; coercion and deception are not. Build conversion from honest levers:

• Specificity over hype — a true number ("cuts month-end close from 9 days to 2") out-converts a superlative ("revolutionary platform") and survives scrutiny.
• Real, attributable proof — named person, role, company, ideally a face. Anonymous "★★★★★ — a happy customer" reads as fabricated and lowers trust.
• Risk reversal, stated plainly — a real guarantee, a genuine free tier, "no card required" only if it is actually true. Honest risk reversal is the strongest ethical conversion lever there is.
• Transparent pricing and terms — show the price, the renewal, the cancellation path. Hiding them converts the wrong people and they churn or chargeback.

Banned — dark patterns (never ship these, even if asked): fake/urgency-faked countdowns and "only 2 left" that reset on reload; "3 people are viewing this right now" invented numbers; confirmshaming opt-outs ("No thanks, I hate saving money"); pre-checked add-ons / opt-ins; sneak-into-basket; forced continuity (free trial that auto-charges with no reminder and a buried cancel); disguised ads and fake "system" notifications; roach-motel signup (one click in, ten to leave). These violate doctrine/design-doctrine.md §0 (looking authored and trustworthy) and the engine's ethics posture. If a stakeholder requests one, refuse and offer the honest equivalent (see references/conversion-credibility.md §Dark-pattern → honest-swap table).

5. Hold the line on accessibility and performance — they ARE conversion

• Accessibility (doctrine/references/wcag-2.2-criteria.md): the CTA must be a real focusable control with a visible focus ring; target size ≥ 24×24px (SC 2.5.8); contrast ≥ the criterion for button text; never colour-only state. An inaccessible CTA is an un-clickable CTA for some visitors — a direct conversion loss, not just a compliance line.
• Performance (doctrine/references/web-performance-budgets-2026.md): the hero is the LCP element — keep it light; a slow first screen is abandoned before the value prop is read. Reserve space for hero media to protect CLS; defer below-the-fold weight. Treat the LCP/INP/CLS budgets as design constraints, not after-thoughts.

6. Specify, then build

Produce a section-by-section spec (see examples/landing-wireframe-spec.md for the shape): per section — purpose, the real content, the type/weight/space treatment, the focal point, the CTA state, and the proof token. Run the checklist below before any markup.

Workflow

1. Define one audience, job, offer, conversion, and post-click outcome.
2. Build a claim–proof–objection map from verified evidence.
3. Sequence value, mechanism, proof, risk reversal, and CTA around commitment level.
4. Prototype responsive and accessible states without dark patterns.
5. Validate comprehension, credibility, conversion tracking, and post-click continuity before release.

Conversion-Credibility Checklist (run before building)

1. One conversion goal named; secondary actions visually subordinate (never a second equal CTA).
2. Message match — hero headline echoes the click's promise.
3. Value prop is a concrete outcome in the visitor's words, sharpened from real content — not a slogan, not lorem.
4. Section spine present and in believable order — claim → outcome → mechanism → proof → objections → ask (deviations have a stated reason).
5. CTA hierarchy — identical repeated primary CTA, value-stating copy, single focal point per screen, minimal fields.
6. All proof is real and attributable — named people/companies/numbers; zero fabricated testimonials, logos, or metrics.
7. Zero dark patterns — no fake scarcity/urgency, confirmshaming, pre-checked opt-ins, forced continuity, sneak-into-cart, disguised ads, roach-motel.
8. Risk reversal and pricing/terms are honest and visible when claimed.
9. CTA passes WCAG 2.2 — focusable, visible focus, ≥24px target, sufficient contrast, not colour-only.
10. Hero respects the performance budget — LCP-light, CLS-reserved.
11. No convergent default — type/colour/layout pass distinctive-by-design (no Inter+indigo gradient, no three-feature-icon row as a reflex, no centred-everything).

If any item can't be satisfied (proof is thin, a stakeholder insists on a dark pattern, no real copy yet), say so and ask — never quietly ship the coercive or convergent version.

Decision Rules

Condition	Page choice	Wrong-choice failure
One dominant conversion	One primary CTA repeated with consistent wording	Competing CTAs split intent
Proof is strong and specific	Place it near the matching claim/objection	A detached logo wall fails to substantiate claims
Commitment is high	Add process, risk reversal, and qualification detail	Premature ask suppresses trust

Capability Contract

Read and search are required for audience, offer, proof, claims, and analytics. Editing is allowed only for requested implementation. Testing, publication, tracking changes, and experiment launch require separate authority and privacy review.

Degraded Mode

If required evidence or tooling is unavailable, use the scoped fallback below and mark the result unverified. Without verified proof or offer detail, deliver a wireframe and evidence-request list, not invented persuasion. Stop publication when claims, pricing, consent, accessibility, analytics, or post-click behaviour are unverified.

Anti-Patterns

• Two co-equal CTAs in the hero ("Start free" and "Contact sales" at identical weight) — the choice paralyses; rank them.
• Feature-listing instead of outcome-selling — a wall of "we have X, Y, Z" with no "so you can…"
• The convergent SaaS template — Inter/Geist, indigo→blue gradient, glass cards, centred hero with two buttons, the three-feature-icon row, a logo strip with no real names. The single most template-looking surface on the web; the Mission targets it directly.
• Fabricated or anonymous proof — stock-photo "customers," "★★★★★ — Anonymous," logos of companies that aren't actually customers. Lowers trust and is dishonest.
• Dark patterns of any kind (see §4 banned list) — they convert the wrong people, invite chargebacks and churn, and violate the engine's ethics. Non-negotiable.
• Friction the conversion doesn't need — a 9-field form for a newsletter; demanding a card for a "free" trial without saying so up front.
• Burying the ask — the only CTA below three screens of scroll, or low-contrast against its background.
• Ignoring message match — a beautiful page that answers a different question than the ad asked.

Outputs

Artefact	Consumer	Evidence and acceptance condition
Conversion brief and page architecture	Marketing, product, and design	Every section advances one audience and conversion
Claim-proof-objection-CTA map	Writers and reviewers	Each substantive claim has attributable support
Prototype and measurement evidence	Engineering and growth owner	Responsive, accessibility, tracking, and post-click checks pass

• A stated page conversion goal and the committed distinctive idea (what + why + human authority), written before markup.
• A section-by-section spec (purpose, real content, type/space treatment, focal point, CTA state, proof token per section) in the shape of examples/landing-wireframe-spec.md.
• A CTA hierarchy definition and a completed conversion-credibility checklist confirming zero dark patterns and real, attributable proof.

Examples

• examples/landing-wireframe-spec.md — a full, real section-by-section landing spec for a sample product (an SMB month-end-close tool), showing hero through closing CTA, the CTA hierarchy, the honest-proof treatment, and the WCAG/perf constraints applied.

References

• references/landing-anatomy.md — the section spine, what each section must answer, above-the-fold budget, CTA-placement rules, and the page-length / cold-vs-warm decisions.
• references/conversion-credibility.md — the honest conversion levers, the full dark-pattern catalog with an honest-swap table, and the proof-authenticity rules. Ethical, real, no dark patterns.
• doctrine/design-doctrine.md — the Mission (§0, "the moat is looking human-made"): conversion is downstream of an authored, trustworthy artifact.
• doctrine/references/wcag-2.2-criteria.md — CTA focusability, target size (SC 2.5.8), contrast, non-colour state.
• doctrine/references/web-performance-budgets-2026.md — hero as LCP, CLS reservation, LCP/INP/CLS as design constraints.
• Sibling skills: 04-web-and-ui-design/distinctive-by-design (run first; gates the build), 14-conversion-and-web-page-patterns/trust-credibility-and-social-proof (P1 — the proof section in depth), 14-conversion-and-web-page-patterns/onboarding-and-first-run-design (P1 — what happens after the click), 06-sector-and-domain-ux/ecommerce-and-checkout-ux (P1 — purchase flows), 10-content-design-and-ux-writing/ux-writing-and-microcopy (the CTA and headline wording).