Google Ads Prospect Audit — Ad Account + Website Read in One Pass, Verdict the Same Afternoon
"What do you think of our account?" is usually a multi-day, two-person answer. It doesn't have to be.
What was getting in the way.
A prospect grants Google Ads access and asks for an assessment. The traditional audit splits across two people and several days: one combs the ad account screen by screen, another reviews the website, and the findings get reconciled into a deck sometime next week. Meanwhile the budget keeps spending — and the most expensive problems (wrong network, fake conversions, broken policy pages) are exactly the ones a screen-by-screen skim tends to miss.
Context
Universal — the pattern applies to any ad-account assessment: new prospects, inherited accounts, quarterly health checks, pre-engagement due diligence.
How the work runs.
- 01
Pull the account through the API, not the UI
A read-only pull covers campaigns, networks, keywords, conversion actions, and spend distribution in one sweep — the whole account as data, instead of a sampled skim of screens.
- 02
Crawl the site in parallel
A read-only crawl walks the landing pages, the conversion paths, and the policy pages (privacy, terms, refund, shipping) — because ad performance claims mean nothing if the site can't receive or track the traffic.
- 03
Follow the spend to where it actually goes
The pass found the large majority of search spend landing on the partner network rather than Google itself, and roughly a third of total spend concentrated on one broad-match consumer keyword — structural findings a surface skim reads right past.
- 04
Test what "conversion" actually means in this account
Every recorded conversion traced to a hardcoded page-load tag on landing pages — one click, one "conversion" — so automated bidding had been optimizing toward the cheapest possible click. Conversion value: zero for twelve consecutive months. The one action representing a real lead had recorded nothing against tens of thousands of paid clicks.
- 05
Say what can't be proven, out loud
The crawl was HTML-only, so a storefront pixel it couldn't read gets flagged as unverified — the report says "this might contain purchase tracking we can't see from outside" rather than letting the team tell a prospect "purchases are untracked" and be wrong in the first meeting. Broken policy pages (redirects and dead links) are flagged as both an ads-policy risk now and a gate on future shopping campaigns.
Evidence from the workflow.
Each system has a role.
intake (the account as data, read-only)
Google Ads API
intake (landing pages, conversion paths, policy pages)
Website crawler
signal (spend concentration, network split, conversion-action tracing)
Analysis layer
action (good/bad/fix, with unverifiable items labeled honestly)
Audit report
Why this is Coworker.
Takes assignments and reports back. You hand it work, it prepares and returns a result.
- 01
Access is read-only on both surfaces — nothing in the account or on the site is changed. Claims in the report are traceable to pulled data or crawled pages; anything the pass couldn't verify is labeled as such rather than asserted. The audit goes to the team, and humans decide what reaches the prospect.
Impact / Outcomes
A multi-day, two-person audit collapses into a same-afternoon verdict covering both the ad account and the site it feeds.
The findings that matter most — spend on the wrong network, conversions that were page loads, a year of zero conversion value, policy pages that could trip enforcement — surface before the first strategy conversation, not after.
The report distinguishes verified findings from unverifiable ones, so nothing said to the prospect has to be walked back.
Find where a workflow like this fits.
Start with the systems, work, constraints, and authority already present in your operation.