Orphex Quality Score Reviewer

Orphex Quality Score Reviewer

Use this skill when asked to diagnose Search keyword Quality Score (QS), explain component patterns, or prioritize ad-group follow-up. QS is a keyword-level diagnostic, not a campaign outcome. Work from supplied exports and documents; an already-authorized read-only source is optional. Do not treat the review as permission to edit ads, keywords, or landing pages.

Gather comparable evidence

Request keyword ID/text, campaign and ad-group IDs, match type, current and historical QS, the three component statuses, date or segment, impressions, clicks, cost, conversions/value, status, final URL, and relevant query or ad evidence. Ask for account timezone, currency, conversion action and attribution window. Include the current and historical period separately because the score and its statuses are benchmark diagnostics, while performance rows may cover a different date range. Historical QS components are evaluated against other advertisers whose ads showed for the exact same search over the preceding 90 days; do not imply that a 7-day performance export measures the same window. See Google's Quality Score guide.

If QS is shown as a dash, missing, or absent, record it as “not available / insufficient evidence,” never zero or poor. Do not fill missing component status from the numerical score. If keyword-level data or the period is absent, explain the limit and request it rather than inferring ad-group QS.

Read components without turning them into a KPI

Keep expected CTR, ad relevance, and landing-page experience as separate status fields. The score runs from 1–10 at the keyword level; Google describes it as diagnostic, says it is not a KPI to aggregate, and says it is not an input in the ad auction. Do not average QS across keywords, add it to performance, set a target score, or promise that raising it will lower CPC or improve rank.

Group rows only when a shared cause is plausible from supplied evidence: same ad group and query theme for ad relevance, shared final URL or page template for landing-page experience, or a coherent set of queries for expected CTR. Prioritize clusters by actual spend, eligible impressions, conversions/value, and the business goal, not by lowest score alone. Report raw counts beside rates and keep zero, missing, and lagged outcomes distinct. Low volume and unavailable components reduce confidence.

Turn a status into a testable hypothesis

For below-average expected CTR, inspect the actual queries, audience/location/time segments, ad message and observed click-through rate; suggest checking message fit before changing bids. For below-average ad relevance, compare search intent with keyword grouping and the ads that could serve; propose a tighter theme or more relevant copy only when the rows support it. For below-average landing-page experience, compare the final URL and page evidence with the query and promised offer; request page speed, mobile, navigation, or content evidence when those facts are not in the export. A component status alone does not identify the cause.

For “Average” or “Above average,” do not claim the rest of the experience is strong: QS does not capture every quality factor. Avoid treating device, location, time, or creative changes as causes without a controlled test or a documented before/after that addresses confounders. Separate observed facts, likely diagnostic explanations, and untested hypotheses.

Recommended output

State scope, period, source, currency, outcome definition, and mismatched QS/performance windows. Provide an action-cluster table: component/status; affected keywords and IDs; representative queries/ad/page; spend, eligible impressions, clicks, conversions/value; evidence; hypothesis; proposed review or test; confidence; and what evidence would confirm it. Include unavailable rows explicitly. Link each statement to the source file and row or segment.

Fictional example: three keywords on one landing page show below-average landing-page experience; together they have $900 spend and four leads in a complete 30-day USD export. Their QS values differ, so do not report an average score. Recommend reviewing the shared page against the three query intents; the pattern supports a page-relevance hypothesis, not proof that the page caused lead cost.

Any later account edit requires explicit authorization for the account, exact keywords, and change. This skill authorizes analysis only.