agentleFS
kelpi-aikelpi-ai/google-ads-skills/skills/quality-score-fixer/SKILL.md

quality-score-fixer

Skill2 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use Google Ads Quality Score components to find the weakest link behind a valuable keyword and draft the smallest useful test. Use when relevance, CTR, or landing-page experience may be holding Search back.

3 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 4

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    When valuable keywords show below-average Quality Score components or weak Search performance.

    line 14
  2. Distinctive:

    Use a connected Google Ads MCP, or paste keyword metrics, component ratings, triggered queries, current ads, and landing-page copy.

    line 15
  3. Distinctive:

    Never pause a profitable or strategically valuable keyword only because its score is low.

    line 40
  4. Distinctive:

    Do not claim that moving from one score to another cuts CPC by a fixed percentage.

    line 42

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 3 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Quality Score Fixer

Doctrine

Quality Score is a diagnostic, not a KPI and not a direct auction input. The useful part is the three component ratings: expected click-through rate, ad relevance, and landing-page experience. Diagnose the component, weigh it against real business performance, and test the smallest credible fix. Do not chase a prettier 1-to-10 number at the expense of conversions.

When to use

  • When valuable keywords show below-average Quality Score components or weak Search performance.
  • Use a connected Google Ads MCP, or paste keyword metrics, component ratings, triggered queries, current ads, and landing-page copy.
  • Bring the primary conversion, target CPA or ROAS, conversion delay, and downstream quality where available.

Run it

Run a READ-ONLY Quality Score diagnosis. Use live Google Ads data if connected; otherwise use what I paste. Change nothing.

1. Confirm the date range, primary conversion, target, and keyword-level spend, clicks, conversions, value, Quality Score, expected CTR, ad relevance, and landing-page experience.
2. Prioritize commercially important keywords with below-average components. Do not rank work by the 1-to-10 score alone.
3. For each diagnosis show: weak component, business importance, observed evidence, competing evidence, root-cause hypothesis, confidence, smallest useful test, and success measure.
4. Use triggered queries, current ad assets, and page copy to test message match before proposing a rewrite.
5. Keep fixes component-specific:
   - expected CTR: query fit and distinct, credible ad assets;
   - ad relevance: tighter alignment among query, keyword, ad group, and ad promise;
   - landing-page experience: message match, usefulness, usability, speed evidence, and one clear next step.
6. Measure both the component rating and business results after enough data and conversion delay. A component can improve while CPA gets worse.
7. If asked for savings, say they cannot be estimated from Quality Score alone. Only calculate a scenario from user-supplied CPC, traffic, conversion, and validated assumptions, labeled as a scenario rather than a forecast.

Do not change bids, keywords, ads, or pages. Do not promise a future score, rank, CPC reduction, or savings. End with "No changes were made."

Guardrails

  • Quality Score helps diagnose user experience. It is not a business outcome and the displayed score is not a direct auction input.
  • Never pause a profitable or strategically valuable keyword only because its score is low.
  • A below-average component points to where to investigate, not the exact root cause.
  • Do not claim that moving from one score to another cuts CPC by a fixed percentage.
  • Fix message and experience problems before treating a higher bid as the answer.

Good output looks like

A short list of component-level diagnoses tied to valuable keywords, each with evidence, one test, and an honest success measure. No fake savings forecast and no bid change.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.