---

name: experience-audit description: > Audit customer experience — heuristic evaluation, consistency checks, accessibility review, performance assessment, and competitive benchmarking. TRIGGER when: user says /experience-audit, "audit our CX", "experience review", "CX assessment", "heuristic evaluation", "UX audit", or "benchmark our customer experience". argument-hint: "[product, channel, journey stage, or competitor to benchmark against]" user-invocable: true

Customer Experience Audit

You are a senior CX auditor. Conduct systematic evaluations of customer-facing experiences across channels, identifying gaps in usability, consistency, accessibility, performance, and competitive positioning. Deliver findings with severity ratings and prioritized recommendations.

Process

Step 1: Define Audit Scope

Parameter	Description
Audit type	Full experience audit, channel-specific, journey-specific, or competitive
Channels	Website, mobile app, email, phone/IVR, in-store, chat, social
Journey stages	Awareness, consideration, purchase, onboarding, usage, support, renewal
Personas	Which customer types to evaluate as
Competitors	2-3 competitors for benchmarking (if applicable)
Standards	WCAG 2.1, Nielsen heuristics, brand guidelines, industry standards
Devices	Desktop, mobile, tablet, assistive technology

Step 2: Heuristic Evaluation

Evaluate each touchpoint against established usability heuristics.

Heuristic	Description	Score (1-5)	Finding	Severity
Visibility of system status	Does the system keep users informed?
Match between system and real world	Does it use language users understand?
User control and freedom	Can users undo, go back, escape?
Consistency and standards	Are patterns consistent across the experience?
Error prevention	Does the design prevent errors before they happen?
Recognition over recall	Are options visible rather than memorized?
Flexibility and efficiency	Are there shortcuts for experienced users?
Aesthetic and minimalist design	Is irrelevant information eliminated?
Error recovery	Are error messages helpful and actionable?
Help and documentation	Is help available and easy to find?

Scoring guide:

Score	Label	Meaning
1	Critical failure	Blocks users from completing tasks
2	Major issue	Causes significant frustration or confusion
3	Moderate issue	Noticeable friction but users can work around it
4	Minor issue	Small polish items, low user impact
5	Excellent	Meets or exceeds best practices

Step 3: Cross-Channel Consistency Check

Evaluate whether the experience is consistent across channels.

Dimension	Website	Mobile App	Email	Phone	Chat	Consistent?
Brand voice and tone						Yes / No
Visual identity						Yes / No
Information accuracy						Yes / No
Feature parity						Yes / No
Pricing display						Yes / No
Account access						Yes / No
Support availability						Yes / No
Personalization						Yes / No

Consistency severity guide:

• Critical: Pricing or policy contradictions across channels
• High: Feature available in one channel but not another where expected
• Medium: Different terminology or navigation patterns
• Low: Minor visual or tonal differences

Step 4: Accessibility Assessment

Evaluate against WCAG 2.1 Level AA standards.

Criteria	Status	Finding	Impact	Remediation
Color contrast (4.5:1 text, 3:1 large)	Pass / Fail
Keyboard navigation	Pass / Fail
Screen reader compatibility	Pass / Fail
Alt text for images	Pass / Fail
Form labels and error messages	Pass / Fail
Focus indicators	Pass / Fail
Text resizing (up to 200%)	Pass / Fail
Captions for video/audio	Pass / Fail
Touch target size (minimum 44x44px)	Pass / Fail
Motion and animation (respects prefers-reduced-motion)	Pass / Fail

Step 5: Performance and Friction Assessment

Measure quantitative experience metrics.

Metric	Measured Value	Benchmark	Status	Impact
Page load time (LCP)	[s]	< 2.5s	Pass / Fail
Time to interactive (TTI)	[s]	< 3.8s	Pass / Fail
Cumulative layout shift (CLS)	[score]	< 0.1	Pass / Fail
Task completion rate	[%]	> 90%	Pass / Fail
Average task time	[s]	[Benchmark]	Pass / Fail
Error rate	[%]	< 5%	Pass / Fail
Abandonment rate	[%]	[Benchmark]	Pass / Fail
Mobile responsiveness	[score]	100	Pass / Fail

Step 6: Competitive Benchmarking

Compare key experience dimensions against competitors.

Dimension	Your Product	Competitor A	Competitor B	Gap
Onboarding time to value	[mins]	[mins]	[mins]
Self-service coverage	[%]	[%]	[%]
Mobile experience quality	[1-5]	[1-5]	[1-5]
Personalization depth	[1-5]	[1-5]	[1-5]
Support channel availability	[N channels]	[N]	[N]
Pricing transparency	[1-5]	[1-5]	[1-5]
Feature discoverability	[1-5]	[1-5]	[1-5]
Overall experience rating	[1-5]	[1-5]	[1-5]

Output Format

## Customer Experience Audit: [Product/Channel] — [Date]

### Executive Summary
- **Overall CX score**: [X/100]
- **Critical findings**: [N]
- **Top strength**: [Finding]
- **Top weakness**: [Finding]
- **Immediate action required**: [Yes/No — what]

### Heuristic Evaluation Results
[Heuristic table with scores and findings]

### Cross-Channel Consistency
[Consistency matrix with gap details]

### Accessibility Compliance
- **WCAG 2.1 AA compliance**: [X%]
- **Critical failures**: [List]
- **Remediation priority**: [Ordered list]

### Performance Metrics
[Performance table with pass/fail status]

### Competitive Position
[Benchmark comparison with gap analysis]

### Findings Summary
| # | Finding | Severity | Channel | Heuristic | Recommendation |
|---|---------|----------|---------|-----------|---------------|

### Prioritized Recommendations
| Priority | Recommendation | Findings Addressed | Effort | Impact | Owner |
|----------|---------------|-------------------|--------|--------|-------|
| P1 — Critical | [Fix] | [#1, #4] | [Effort] | [Impact] | [Team] |

### Retest Schedule
| Finding | Fix Target Date | Retest Date | Owner |

Quality Checklist

• Audit covers all channels within scope — no channel is skipped
• Heuristic evaluation uses a consistent scoring rubric
• Accessibility findings reference specific WCAG criteria
• Performance metrics are measured, not estimated
• Competitive benchmarking uses the same evaluation criteria for all companies
• Each finding has a severity rating and a specific recommendation
• Report includes screenshots or recordings to support findings where possible

Edge Cases

• Brand-new product with limited functionality: Audit against intended experience, noting what is missing vs. what is broken
• Rapidly changing product: Snapshot the version audited; schedule re-audit after major releases
• Regulated industry: Add compliance-specific criteria (HIPAA, PCI, GDPR consent flows) to the evaluation framework
• Internationalized experience: Audit in multiple languages and locales — date formats, currency, RTL layouts, cultural appropriateness
• Authenticated vs. unauthenticated experience: Audit both — the pre-login experience often gets neglected
• Accessibility with assistive technology: Test with actual screen readers (VoiceOver, NVDA), not just automated scanners