Check ad copy, landing pages, VSLs, and emails for platform compliance issues โ Meta/Facebook, Google, TikTok, YouTube, and ClickBank. Use this skill whenever the user asks to check compliance, run a compliance audit, review copy for platform policy violations, check if copy will get banned or flagged, audit for Meta/Facebook ad policy, or scan for trigger words. Also trigger for 'is this compliant', 'will this get rejected', 'check for banned words', 'platform policy check', or any task involving reviewing direct response copy against advertising platform rules.
Installation
Mit Codex oder Claude installieren Kopieren Sie diesen Prompt, fรผgen Sie ihn in Codex, Claude oder einen anderen Assistant ein und lassen Sie die Skill-Seite prรผfen und installieren.
Check ad copy, landing pages, VSLs, and emails for platform compliance issues โ Meta/Facebook, Google, TikTok, YouTube, and ClickBank. Use this skill whenever the user asks to check compliance, run a compliance audit, review copy for platform policy violations, check if copy will get banned or flagged, audit for Meta/Facebook ad policy, or scan for trigger words. Also trigger for 'is this compliant', 'will this get rejected', 'check for banned words', 'platform policy check', or any task involving reviewing direct response copy against advertising platform rules.
This skill checks direct response copy (ads, landing pages, VSLs, emails) against platform compliance rules. Built on real-world compliance knowledge from practitioners who've been banned 300+ times and learned what actually triggers rejections.
The goal: catch compliance issues BEFORE your ad gets rejected or your account gets banned, while preserving persuasive power through compliant rewrites.
Step 1: Classify the Copy
Before checking anything, determine these four things. Ask the user if unclear.
Copy Type
Ad (primary text, headline, description, video script)
Landing page (bridge page, pre-sell, PDP)
VSL script (video sales letter transcript)
Email (broadcast, sequence, autoresponder)
Advertorial (native content, editorial-style)
Platform
Meta/Facebook (strictest โ deep rules below)
Google Ads (medical claims ban, bait-and-switch enforcement)
Digital product (lower scrutiny โ no post-purchase surveys)
Coaching / service (income claim sensitivity)
Note: Digital products with physical upsells may be reclassified as ecom.
Funnel Position
Front-end ad (strictest rules)
Landing page (strict โ product must be visible, exit nav required)
Upsell page (more leniency โ countdown timers, urgency, aggressive language OK post-purchase)
Step 2: Load Trigger Words Reference
Read references/trigger-words.md for the consolidated table of trigger words and compliant substitutions.
Step 3: Phase 1 โ Checklist Audit
Run through each category. Report PASS / FAIL / WARN for each.
The 9-Point Compliance Checklist
1. Personal Attributes
No "you" or "your" assuming the viewer has a condition (ecom/supplement ads)
No questions implying problems ("Are you struggling with...?" = implies they have the problem)
No singling out demographics ("women's metabolism" = personal attribute)
No calling out conditions ("if you have diabetes" = implies they have it)
Uses third-person framing where needed ("Many Americans..." / "Most people...")
Why this matters: Facebook considers implying you know the viewer's personal attributes (age, medical conditions, body type, financial status) a violation. Change "you" to "I" when describing pain, or use third-person framing.
Compliant patterns:
"Many Americans are looking for ways to..." (third-person)
"I used to struggle with..." (first-person story)
"People working on problem areas..." (general group)
Non-compliant patterns:
"Are you struggling with...?" (implies they have the problem)
"If you have diabetes..." (calls out condition)
"Women over 40 who..." (singles out demographic + age)
Scientific claims have citation + full study reference at page bottom
9. Ad-to-Page Consistency
Visual consistency (same logo/watermark across ad and page)
Same messaging vibe (viewer feels they're in the right place)
No bait-and-switch (ad claims match landing page content)
Same root domain (no redirect chains to different domains โ common ban reason)
Go direct to brand URL (no affiliate-style redirect links)
Step 4: Phase 2 โ Line-Level Flagging
Go through the copy line by line. For each issue found:
### Issue N [SEVERITY]
> "The exact problematic text quoted here"
**Rule:** Which compliance rule this violates and why
**Rewrite:** A compliant alternative that preserves persuasive power
Severity levels:
HIGH โ Likely rejection or account ban. Must fix before running.
MEDIUM โ Risky, could be flagged depending on reviewer. Should fix.
LOW โ Minor concern, could be flagged in stricter review cycles.
Prioritize issues by severity. HIGH first, then MEDIUM, then LOW.
Rewrite rules:
Preserve the persuasive intent of the original
Use compliant substitutions from references/trigger-words.md
Maintain the copy's voice and rhythm
The rewrite should be drop-in ready โ same approximate length, same tone
Step 5: Compliance Score
After both phases, calculate:
Scoring: Start at 10. Subtract 2 per HIGH issue, 1 per MEDIUM, 0.5 per LOW. Floor at 0.
Feedback surveys to purchasers (ecom only); low scores = penalty
Digital vs Ecom Scrutiny on Meta
Factor
Digital Products
Ecom / Supplements
Post-purchase surveys
No (automatic delivery)
Yes (feedback score)
Page score penalties
No
Yes (below threshold = automatic penalty)
Ingestible scrutiny
N/A
Extra fine-tooth-comb
Reclassification risk
Yes, if physical upsell
Default
Overall scrutiny
Lower
Higher
Compliant Headline Rewrites (Meta Examples)
Non-Compliant
Why It Fails
Compliant
"Are you struggling with high blood sugar?"
Personal attribute + disease name
"Many Americans are looking for ways to help support balanced glucose levels"
"Regulate erratic blood sugar with XYZ"
Definitive claim ("regulate")
"XYZ helps support erratic blood sugar"
"Why a spare tire increases death risk"
Sensational + scare tactic
"How does a spare tire impact health?"
"The ideal way to stabilize weight"
"The ideal" = only way
"An ideal way to support weight management"
"These 5 foods ruin women's metabolism"
Personal attribute + negative word
"Discover how 5 foods impact metabolism"
"Avoid these 5 foods at all costs"
Scare tactic + negative
"5 foods that may impact digestive health"
"If you don't take X, you'll gain weight"
Scare tactic + "you" + definitive
"How X may help support weight management"
Facebook vs YouTube Comparison
Element
Facebook
YouTube
Before/afters
Banned
Allowed
Zooming into body parts
Banned
Allowed
Aggressive claims
Heavily restricted
More lenient
Scrutiny level
High (especially ingestibles)
Lower
Language tone
Must be positive/neutral
Can be more direct
Google Ads (Light Coverage)
Prohibited: medical claims, "free trial," "miracle cure," "unproven remedy"
All claims must be supported by scientific evidence
Bait-and-switch: Landing page must align perfectly with ad
Consequences: Immediate account suspension without warning; potential permanent ban
Google is less nuanced than Meta โ they tend to ban first, ask questions never
TikTok (Light Coverage)
Mandatory commercial content disclosure for all promotional posts
Claims must be proven with in-frame disclosures
Medical props or "biometric imagery" banned
Hormone-related keyword ads removed
Supplement advertisers must show regional certification before approval
More focused on disclosure requirements than language policing
YouTube (Light Coverage)
More lenient than Facebook โ before/afters allowed, more direct claims
Same FTC rules apply โ no deceptive claims, income disclaimers required
Many things banned on Facebook are fine on YouTube
Still: no outright false claims, no medical diagnosis language
ClickBank (Light Coverage)
Never use "lifetime" for lifetime access
No personalized coaching/services claims that cannot be delivered at scale
Cannot claim specific income from techniques taught
Reasonable assumption: Average person can achieve supplemental income with effort
Sales pages must clearly explain what customers receive
Salesmanship encouraged, but do not over-embellish
FDA Language Rules (Health/Supplement Specific)
For health and supplement copy, FDA rules apply on top of platform rules:
Cannot claim to treat, cure, diagnose, or prevent any disease
Structure talk is OK: Describe anatomy and body functions ("supporting healthy liver function")
Function talk is OK: "Helping brain function in a healthy way"
Conditional language required: "may," "can," "helps support"
Abstract nouns safe: Happiness, wellness, vitality, freedom (cannot be measured = cannot be disputed)
Specific FDA language flags:
"High blood sugar" โ use "erratic blood sugar"
"Blood sugar spike" โ use "blood sugar fluctuations"
"Managing your blood sugar" โ use "sustaining your blood sugar"
Pro tip: Read FDA warning letters โ they show the exact language the FDA does not like. These are essentially a cheat sheet for what to avoid.
The Compliance Philosophy
Compliance is a creative constraint that produces better copy. When you cannot rely on hype, you need:
Better stories
Stronger mechanisms
More credible proof
More nuanced emotional appeals
The best modern DR copy is MORE sophisticated because of compliance. Smart copywriters treat compliance as a competitive advantage โ those who understand it can scale while others get banned.
The golden rule: Write for conversion, then edit for compliance. Do not let compliance thinking kill the creative process โ get the persuasive draft right first, then run it through this checklist.
Being compliant and being persuasive are not mutually exclusive. The best copy does both.
