The playbook
Case Study Page Design: Checklist
Use this case study page design checklist before a new release, a handoff, or a scheduled review. Its purpose is to verify the decisions that affect relevant case-study-assisted inquiries. Check an actual page or interaction record; a box marked complete without evidence does not show that the customer journey works.
Put the task in context
A strong project page separates the client's starting situation, your actual contribution, and the evidence for the outcome. Include dates and measurement context for numbers. If the example is hypothetical, label it as an illustration rather than presenting it as a customer story.
Before you use the checklist
Name the exact item being checked and its purpose. Gather client context, work, evidence, outcome, permission. If one of those details is unknown, mark it as unknown and assign a way to resolve it. An invented value makes the checklist look complete while weakening every later decision.
Working checklist
| Check | Evidence to keep | Responsible role |
|---|---|---|
| Describe the starting problem and constraints | A dated observation showing how client context was verified | website lead |
| Explain the work performed and evidence collected | A dated observation showing how work was verified | designer or developer |
| State outcomes with dates methodology and limitations | A dated observation showing how evidence was verified | site owner |
Check the failure path
- Look specifically for this failure: presenting hypothetical numbers as customer results.
- Label illustrative scenarios and obtain permission for real examples. Record the actual correction, not just the intention to make it.
- Repeat the affected task after the correction and check permission.
- Make sure the next owner can find the decision and supporting evidence.
Use three outcomes for each check
Mark an item as complete only when the expected behavior or information has been observed. Mark it as incomplete when a required condition is absent. Use not applicable when the condition genuinely does not belong to the chosen scope, and write a short reason. These states keep a review useful without forcing every process into an identical mold.
For example, if the check is “Describe the starting problem and constraints,” a meeting about the subject is not the evidence itself. Retain the relevant client context and work, the decision made from them, and the result of checking that decision. The record should allow someone who missed the meeting to understand what changed.
Decide what must be resolved first
An incomplete item that prevents present a real project with enough context for readers to evaluate its relevance deserves attention before a cosmetic improvement. Assign an owner and a next action to that issue. Keep optional refinements visible, but do not let them obscure a failure in the core process.
Close the review
Recheck corrected items and note anything still uncertain. The checklist is finished when the next owner understands what was verified and what remains open. Follow relevant case-study-assisted inquiries using a consistent definition so later reviews can connect execution quality with useful results.
Keep the page’s main task visible when adding helpful detail. Supporting information should reduce uncertainty at the decision point. If a section introduces a second unrelated offer, decide whether it belongs on another page.
Skip the manual steps. Let AgentixHUB run this for every client.
Start now