The playbook
Website Launch Checklist: Review Process
A useful website launch checklist review ends with a supported decision for each item examined. Define the evidence required before opening the report: check, environment, evidence, owner, status. These fields give reviewers a shared basis for agreeing what is working, what needs attention, and who should act.
Put the task in context
Check production domain routing, HTTPS, direct deep URLs, forms, notifications, consent-dependent tracking, page metadata, and intended indexing settings. Use a real test inquiry and verify its arrival. Keep the recovery owner available during the initial release.
Set the review boundary
Choose the records or journeys that matter to the current question. Include a normal case, a recently changed case, and an exception where available. This is a diagnostic sample, not a claim that every item has been checked. Record how the sample was selected and what would justify expanding it.
Use explicit review criteria
| Criterion | Review question |
|---|---|
| Check content navigation forms and error handling | Is the supporting check current and traceable? |
| Confirm domain metadata indexing intent and analytics | Does environment support the decision being made? |
| Assign a launch owner and a recovery plan | Can the next owner verify status? |
Inspect the evidence before assigning a result
For each item, compare the intended behavior with the observed behavior. Pay particular attention to reviewing only screenshots instead of real interactions. If it appears, record where it occurs and which assumption it contradicts. Distinguish a verified defect from an unanswered question and from a preference about how the work should look.
Where the evidence supports the known correction, test each main journey from entry to confirmed outcome. Give that action to an accountable owner with a description of the expected result. If you cannot yet identify the cause, assign a diagnostic action rather than prescribing a speculative repair.
Record a decision that can be acted on
| Decision | When to use it |
|---|---|
| Keep | The current state serves the intended task and the evidence is adequate. |
| Revise | A specific gap is confirmed and the proposed action addresses it. |
| Investigate | Important information is missing or conflicting. |
| Retire or combine | The item has no distinct useful purpose in the current scope. |
Verify corrections and expand selectively
Recheck the affected page or interaction record after the owner completes the action. Then inspect other items sharing the relevant cause. A shared template, process rule, or data source may justify expanding the review. Similar wording or appearance alone is a weaker reason.
Turn the review into a decision summary
Summarize the affected scope, confirmed findings, actions, and open questions. Connect the findings to critical launch checks completed using the same definition as the baseline. A good summary lets the responsible person decide what happens next without reading every working note.
Use realistic content lengths and assets during review. Short placeholder headings can conceal overflow and hierarchy problems that appear with real service names, prices, or instructions. Check the result after the final content is inserted.
Skip the manual steps. Let AgentixHUB run this for every client.
Start now