Audits SaaS pricing page URLs against 12 psychology principles, scoring compliance and providing ranked reports with tier-specific rewrite suggestions and quick wins.
npx claudepluginhub varnan-tech/opendirectory --plugin opendirectory-gtm-skillsThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
Scrape any SaaS pricing page and audit it against 12 proven pricing psychology
Performs 53-point conversion audit on landing or sales pages, evaluating customer focus, narrative arc, copy quality, design, CTAs, and proof. Delivers scored report with prioritized fixes.
Guides creation, optimization, and auditing of pricing page content, structure, and strategies for SaaS including tiers, models, visibility, and placement.
Optimizes pricing strategies, models (freemium, tiered, per-seat, usage-based), and pages using psychology tactics like anchoring, decoy effects, and tier design frameworks.
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
Scrape any SaaS pricing page and audit it against 12 proven pricing psychology principles. Get a scored Markdown report with specific rewrite suggestions per tier and a "Top 3 Quick Wins" section.
Ask the user: "Which SaaS pricing page should I audit? Share the full URL (e.g. https://linear.app/pricing)"
If no URL is provided, stop and ask. Do not proceed without a valid URL starting with http:// or https://.
Run the scraper script with the URL:
python scripts/scrape_pricing.py "URL_HERE"
The script outputs structured text to stdout. Capture the output — it contains:
If the script fails (timeout, blocked, invalid URL), tell the user: "The page could not be scraped: [error]. Try a different URL or check if the site blocks bots."
Analyze the scraped content against each principle. For each, assign:
Anchoring — Is there a high-priced plan shown first or prominently to make others feel cheaper?
Decoy Effect — Is there a middle-tier plan designed to make the top tier look like better value?
Loss Aversion Framing — Does copy use "don't miss out", "limited", "you'll lose access" rather than purely gain language?
Feature-vs-Value Naming — Do plan names/descriptions highlight outcomes ("Close more deals") vs just features ("10 seats")?
Social Proof Placement — Are testimonials, logos, or user counts shown near pricing tiers (not just on a separate page)?
Urgency / Scarcity Signals — Is there a countdown timer, limited spots badge, or "offer ends" language?
Plan Naming Psychology — Are plan names aspirational (Starter/Growth/Scale) vs generic (Basic/Pro/Enterprise)?
CTA Button Copy — Do CTAs say action-outcome ("Start growing free") vs generic ("Sign up" or "Get started")?
Free Trial vs Freemium Framing — Is the free offer framed clearly? Does it reduce friction or create confusion?
Price Ending Tactics — Do prices end in 9 ($49, $99) for perceived value, or round numbers ($50, $100) for premium feel?
Visual Hierarchy of Tiers — Is the recommended/popular plan visually highlighted (badge, border, size difference)?
Guarantee / Trust Signal Presence — Is there a money-back guarantee, "no credit card required", or security badge near the CTA?
Output the report in this exact Markdown structure:
# Pricing Page Psychology Audit
**URL:** [URL]
**Audited on:** [today's date]
**Overall Score:** X/12 principles passing
---
## Audit Results
### 1. Anchoring — ✅ Pass / ⚠️ Needs Work / ❌ Missing
**What we found:** [1-2 sentences from the page]
**Suggestion:** [Specific rewrite or change to make]
[Repeat for all 12 principles]
---
## 🏆 Top 3 Quick Wins
These are your highest-leverage changes, prioritized by impact vs effort:
**Quick Win #1 — [Principle name]**
Current: "[exact copy from page]"
Rewrite to: "[your improved version]"
Why: [1 sentence on the psychological mechanism]
**Quick Win #2 — [Principle name]**
...
**Quick Win #3 — [Principle name]**
...
Check before presenting the report:
Fix any violation before output.
After presenting the report, offer: