Best for
- Teams making many product or performance claims
- Companies preparing launches or major campaigns
- Marketers cleaning up inconsistent proof language
Inventory claims across your website, ads, decks, and campaigns, map each to approved evidence, and flag unsupported, outdated, overbroad, or context-dependent language before reuse.
A claim-evidence register with source copy, claim type, proof, evidence age, risk, required qualifier, owner, and correction priority.
Quick view
Check the audience, core tools, and access before you start the detailed steps.
Best for
Core tools
1 tool used across the workflow.
Access
Preview the open steps, then unlock the remaining implementation details and prompts.
Why this works
Most claim problems are not outright fabrications; they are statements that became broader than the evidence, lost a qualifier, or stayed live after the proof changed. A claim register makes the relationship between copy and evidence explicit.
Expected results
Claim traceability
Material claims map to evidence
Teams can see what supports customer-facing language.
Risk reduction
Unsupported and outdated claims are flagged before reuse
The audit catches drift before it spreads across campaigns.
Faster review
Approved claims and qualifiers become reusable
Future content does not restart proof review from zero.
Step-by-step workflow
The first 2 steps are open. Pro unlocks the remaining steps, copy-paste prompts, pro tips, tool-by-tool setup guidance, and implementation details.
30 min
30 min
Give Claude your internal rules for product facts, comparative claims, customer results, benchmark data, security, compliance, AI capability, and performance promises. Ask it to turn the rules into a review rubric with required evidence and qualifiers. Have the appropriate owner approve the rubric before auditing copy.
A claim-review rubric with evidence standards.
Different claim types need different proof burdens.
ROLE
You are a conservative B2B marketing claim auditor.
OBJECTIVE
Create a claim-review rubric from our approved rules.
INPUTS
{{claim_policies}}
{{approved_proof_types}}
{{restricted_topics}}
OUTPUT
Return claim category, evidence required, qualifier rules, expiry or review trigger, risk indicators, and reviewer.
GUARDRAILS
Do not provide legal conclusions. Flag items that require legal or compliance review.
Do not invent facts, metrics, quotes, identities, or source access.
UNCERTAINTY
Label missing evidence, weak samples, and conflicts instead of guessing.
HUMAN REVIEW
A named human must approve public claims, outreach, spend changes, customer-facing copy, or system-of-record updates.45 min
45 min
Provide representative website, ad, deck, and campaign copy to Claude and ask it to extract explicit and implied claims. Preserve the exact source location and wording. Review the extraction so ordinary descriptive copy is not mislabeled as a quantified claim while subtle implied promises are not missed.
A source-linked inventory of explicit and implied marketing claims.
“Fastest way” is still a claim even when no number appears.
Pro workflow preview
Previewing 2 of 6 steps
Get the remaining 4 steps, copy-paste prompts, pro tips, tool-by-tool setup guidance, and ongoing workflow and prompt releases.
$9/month
Related workflows
Continue with workflows that share a similar GTM motion, category, or tool stack.
A messaging drift report with source excerpts, severity, intentional versus accidental variation, correction recommendations, owners, and approved exceptions.
A reusable voice-of-customer phrasebook with source context, recurrence notes, segment, stage, approved use cases, and language that should not be overgeneralized.
A concise executive memo with decision, evidence, alternatives, uncertainty, recommendation, risks, and explicit approval or action requested.