資料には具体的なスキルの内容や手順が記載されていないため、用途や得られる結果を特定できません。
- 用途を確認したいとき
- 入力や手順を確認したいとき
- 期待する結果を確認したいとき
Meta広告の配信状態や顧客の検討段階を確認し、平均CPAだけに頼らず、成果の変動やアカウントの不足点を根拠付きで診断して次のテストを提案します。
Diagnose Meta Ads campaign performance and account gaps using Meta's actual system mechanics — including customer-journey coverage, Breakdown Effect, Learning Phase, Auction Overlap, Pacing, and Creative Fatigue. Use for performance diagnosis, account audits, full-funnel or TOF/MOF/BOF gap analysis, deciding what to test or create next, and producing novice-friendly recommendations without forcing every campaign or ad into a funnel stage.
実行スコア 未検証
インストール方法を見るMeta広告のキャンペーンやアカウントを、配信の仕組みに沿って診断します。キャンペーン設定に応じた評価単位を確認し、学習中かどうか、平均値と次の成果あたりの効率の違い、オークションの重複、予算の消化状況、日々の変動が通常の範囲かを見ます。アカウント監査では、キャンペーン名だけで判断せず、新規顧客への訴求、比較検討の支援、購入意向への対応がそろっているかを確認します。結果は根拠と確信度を添え、期待する影響や試し方、必要に応じて元に戻す方法を含む仮説としてまとめます。
CPAが上がった理由を調べたいときや、広告セット・配置の停止を判断する前に状況を整理したいときに向いています。予算を増やす前の監査、顧客の検討段階を支える情報の不足確認、次に試す広告の検討にも使えます。Meta広告に詳しくない人向けに、指標や用語を説明するレポートも作れます。
入力には広告マネージャのCSV、貼り付けた表、スクリーンショット、または既存のMeta Marketing API接続によるデータを使います。アカウントへの書き込みや広告クリエイティブの生成、ランディングページ分析、複数媒体の比較は行いません。情報が欠けている場合は確信度が下がり、証拠がないことを不足の証明とは扱いません。
この紹介文は、公開されている SKILL.md をもとに AI(OpenAI Codex)が作成しました。正確な仕様は下の原文を確認してください。
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Most "Meta Ads analysis" stops at "this CPA is high, pause it." That's wrong more often than it's right. Meta's delivery system optimizes for marginal efficiency — the cost of the next conversion — not average efficiency across a snapshot. A segment with a higher average CPA is often the one keeping your overall campaign cheap. Pausing it makes things worse.
This skill diagnoses Meta campaigns the way a senior media buyer would: at the right evaluation level, accounting for learning state, separating noise from signal, and explaining why the system is making the decisions it's making before recommending any change. It can also audit whether the account supports the complete customer journey without assuming that TOF, MOF, and BOF must be separate campaigns.
Core principle: Holistic first, then drill down. Marginal over average. Customer-journey coverage over rigid funnel structure. Dynamic over static. Every recommendation is a testable hypothesis with expected impact, not a directive.
For account audits, full-funnel reviews, or questions about what is missing, read and apply references/customer-journey-coverage.md before analyzing the account.
guided by default; use expert when the user asks for technical detail or demonstrates strong media-buying knowledgeDo not block when some coverage fields are absent. Record what is missing, lower confidence, and distinguish "no evidence available" from "the account has no coverage."
This is the most important step. Evaluating at the wrong level is the #1 source of wrong recommendations.
| Campaign Setup | Correct Evaluation Level | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Advantage+ Campaign Budget (CBO) | Campaign level | System pools budget across ad sets — only campaign totals reflect reality |
| Automatic placements (no CBO) | Ad Set level | System pools budget across placements within the ad set |
| Multiple ads in 1 ad set | Ad Set level | System pools delivery across ads |
| Manual placements + ABO | Placement / Ad Set level | Each is independent |
Output for this phase: State the evaluation level explicitly and explain why before any metric is interpreted.
If asked "is this Meta placement underperforming?" on a CBO campaign, the answer is "wrong question — at CBO the placement-level CPA is misleading. Here's the campaign total..."
Before judging anything, check delivery state per ad set.
Learning state checklist:
Learning (delivery less stable, CPA typically higher, results not predictive)Learning Limited = can't get enough events → flag as a structural issue, not a performance issueSignificant edits that reset learning:
Output for this phase: Per ad set, mark Active / Learning / Learning Limited. Caveat all conclusions for anything in learning. Do not recommend pausing a Learning ad set based on CPA alone.
Run the diagnosis through these six lenses. Each one explains a different class of "weird" behavior.
The Breakdown Effect: the system shifts budget toward segments where the next conversion is cheapest, not where the average conversion is cheapest. A segment can have a high average CPA in a breakdown report and still be the right place for budget.
How to spot it:
Mandatory framing in the report: Never recommend pausing a segment based solely on higher average CPA/CPM in a breakdown report. Removing it will often raise total cost. Frame any cut as a hypothesis to test with a holdout, not an instruction.
For each ad with sufficient impressions (~500+), check the three rankings:
| Ranking | Below Average → | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Quality Ranking | Creative is the problem | Test new creative formats / hooks |
| Engagement Rate Ranking | Hook isn't pulling | Test new opener / first 3 seconds |
| Conversion Rate Ranking | Post-click is leaking | Check the landing page against the ad (use analyze-performance) |
Two below average + one average = creative refresh. All three below average = scrap and rebuild.
Symptoms: ad sets in the same campaign chronically Learning Limited, underspending budget, or showing erratic delivery.
Causes: Overlapping audiences within the same ad account / Page mean only one of your ads enters each auction (Meta picks the highest-value one; the others are excluded — you don't bid against yourself, but the suppressed ad sets can't learn).
Action:
Pacing = the system smoothing budget across the day/period to capture the best opportunities. Daily snapshots will look uneven by design.
How to read it:
Distinguish noise from trend before recommending anything.
| Signal | Verdict |
|---|---|
| Day-to-day CPA swing within 20–30% | Normal — ignore |
| Weekend vs. weekday delta | Normal — control for it |
| Gradual change over weeks | Trend — investigate |
| Sudden ≥50% cost increase sustained 3+ days | Real problem — diagnose |
| Delivery near zero | Account/asset/policy issue — check first |
| Conv rate dropping while spend rises | Creative fatigue or LP regression |
Always check sample size. A 1-conversion difference at low volume is meaningless.
Run this lens for account audits, full-funnel reviews, requests about TOF/MOF/BOF, or questions about what to create next. Follow references/customer-journey-coverage.md.
Start by identifying whether the account is consolidated, funnel-segmented, hybrid, or unclear. Then evaluate whether the account supports these customer jobs:
Campaigns and ads are evidence for the coverage map; they are not objects that must each receive one TOF/MOF/BOF label. One campaign or creative may support multiple customer jobs. Only make a stage-specific claim when the audience, message, offer, destination, or optimization event supports it.
Identify gaps in coverage, messaging, handoffs, delivery, or measurement. Do not report a missing stage merely because there is no campaign named after that stage, and do not recommend splitting a consolidated campaign unless the evidence shows a specific problem that separation would test.
Before writing the report, restate every performance finding from Phase 3 in terms of what the system is trying to do:
"Placement A shows $10 average CPA vs Placement B's $15. Time-series shows A's CPA rising. The system is correctly shifting toward B because B's marginal CPA is now lower. Recommendation: do nothing on placements; test new creative in A to lower its marginal CPA."
If a performance finding can't be restated in marginal/system-mechanics terms, it's probably noise — drop it. For coverage findings, require evidence from the customer journey and state confidence explicitly.
Use this exact structure. No deviation.
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
- 2–3 sentences on overall health
- Top 1 thing to do, top 1 thing NOT to do
2. EVALUATION LEVEL
- Stated explicitly with the reason
3. LEARNING STATUS
- Per-ad-set table: Active / Learning / Learning Limited
- Caveats applied to any in-learning analysis
4. PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW
- Standardized metric naming (see table below)
- Aggregate first, then drill-down
- Compare to target where given, benchmarks otherwise
5. CUSTOMER-JOURNEY COVERAGE (include for account/funnel audits)
- Account model: Consolidated / Funnel-segmented / Hybrid / Unclear
- Table: Customer job / What exists / Gap or no gap / Evidence / Confidence / Next test
- Customer jobs: Create demand / Build consideration / Convert intent
- One campaign or ad may support multiple jobs
- Never infer a gap from campaign names alone
6. DIAGNOSIS
- Findings from Phase 3, each tagged to its lens
(Marginal / Relevance / Overlap / Pacing / Fluctuation / Coverage)
- Each finding cites specific data
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
- Each = hypothesis + expected impact + how to test
- Marked Critical / High / Medium / Low priority
- Anything paused/scaled has a rollback plan
- For guided reports, end with no more than three prioritized actions
8. BREAKDOWN EFFECT NOTES
- Explicit callouts where average ≠ marginal
- "Do not do X" warnings if the data tempts a wrong move
These are not style suggestions. Violating them produces wrong analysis.
get_recommendations first if you have live API access. If your recommendation diverges from Meta's, explicitly explain why.Always rename raw metric names to these standardized display names in any output:
| Raw | Display |
|---|---|
impressions | Impressions |
reach | Reach (Accounts Center accounts) |
frequency | Frequency |
spend | Amount Spent |
cpm | CPM |
clicks | Clicks (all) |
cpc | CPC (all) |
ctr | CTR (all) |
cost_per_action_type:link_click | CPC (Link Click) |
outbound_clicks_ctr | Outbound CTR |
actions:purchase | Purchases |
action_values:purchase | Purchase Value |
cost_per_action_type:purchase | Cost per Purchase |
purchase_roas | Purchase ROAS (return on ad spend) |
video_thruplay_watched_actions | ThruPlays |
The misinterpretation that Meta's system shifts budget into "underperforming" segments. In reality the system maximizes total results by optimizing for marginal efficiency. A breakdown report sliced by placement, demographic, or device shows averages — but the system optimizes for the next dollar, not the average. A segment with high average CPA may be protecting overall campaign efficiency by preventing even higher marginal cost elsewhere.
Delivery state where the system is exploring how to deliver a new or significantly edited ad set. Performance is less stable, CPA is typically higher, and results are not predictive of long-term performance. Exits after ~50 optimization events within 7 days of the last significant edit. Don't edit during learning (resets the clock). Don't fragment with too many ad sets (each needs its own 50 events). Use realistic budgets — too small or too large gives bad signal.
When ad sets share overlapping audiences within the same ad account, only the highest-value ad from your portfolio enters each auction. The others are excluded. Symptoms: chronic Learning Limited, underspending, erratic delivery. Fix: consolidate ad sets, or pause the lower-performing overlapping ones to free up auction entries.
The system spreads spend across the day/period to capture best opportunities. Daily under/overspend is by design — only sustained underspend (3+ days) is a real signal.
Effectiveness decreases as the same audience sees the same creative repeatedly. Watch frequency (>3–4 in a 7-day window for prospecting) and conversion-rate decline while spend stays flat. Refresh creative on a rotation rather than waiting for fatigue to show in CPA.
Day-to-day CPA variation within 20–30% is normal. Weekend/weekday differences are normal. Sudden ≥50% sustained cost increases over 3+ days, near-zero delivery, or conv-rate drops while spend rises are the only patterns worth diagnosing as "problems."
make-static-ads for variants and ad-angle-miner for source material.analyze-performance, whose diagnosis checks page and message match, whenever Conversion Rate Ranking is below average.ad-campaign-analyzer for cross-channel budget reallocation.ad-campaign-analyzer — Multi-platform performance review and budget reallocation. Run this first if you have multiple channels; run meta-ads-analyzer after for the Meta-specific deep dive.analyze-performance — Pair with this when Conversion Rate Ranking is below average: its diagnosis checks whether the landing page matches the ad.make-static-ads — Generate variants when creative fatigue is the diagnosis.launch-meta-ad-campaign — Prepare a new paused campaign when the diagnosis points to "rebuild, don't fix".Meta system-mechanics framing (Breakdown Effect, Learning Phase, Auction Overlap reference content) adapted from an MIT-licensed Meta ads analyzer project by Mathias Chu.
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
ログインなしで書き込めます。使ってみた感想、質問、動かなかった環境などを気軽にどうぞ。
まだコメントはありません。最初のコメントを書いてみませんか。
資料には具体的なスキルの内容や手順が記載されていないため、用途や得られる結果を特定できません。
顧客の課題や商品情報、広告事例を調べ、根拠のある広告訴求と静止画・動画・コピー案にまとめます。動画案は実際の制作フォーマットとの相性も確認し、商品単位の角度集として整理します。
Google、Meta、LinkedInなどの広告実績を分析し、成果の出た広告や予算の無駄を特定します。停止・拡大・テスト案や、具体的な予算配分を提案します。
広告費と登録後の成果を照合し、質の高いリード獲得にかかった実コストを算出します。広告素材ごとに拡大・維持・調査・停止の判断材料を整理するスキルです。
Meta広告を始める前にブランド情報を調べ、予算や広告表現に関わる不明点だけを質問して準備を整えます。確認事項と仮定を記録し、ブランド情報とキャンペーン概要を作成します。
広告文や画像内の表現を配信先と商品カテゴリのルールに照らして確認し、直せる箇所を修正しながら、法務や人の判断が必要なリスクを広告ごとに整理します。