Creative acceptance scorecard
Updated 2026-08-15 · Risk-term list version 2026-08-15c
A sheet for the moment between "the video came back" and "we spent money on it". It borrows one rule from user research: only observable things score, and "it looks nice" is zero. Seven pass/fail checks first, then a 0–10 score that decides the spend.
The full text is below, or download the .md. Free, commercial use allowed, edit it however you like, no attribution required.
The template is in English because the reader — a creator or a production partner — usually is.
Download creative-scorecard.mdPlain Markdown — paste it into any doc tool, or print it.
What is in it
| Section | What it covers |
|---|---|
| A. Brief compliance (pass/fail — any fail sends it back) | |
| B. Score (0–10) | |
| C. What we do next | |
| D. Notes back to the creator |
How to use it
- Section A is a gate, not a score. Any unchecked box goes back for a re-edit or re-shoot. Do not paper over it with a caption — that caption is itself a risk.
- Section B has negative points on purpose. The strongest moment landing after second 15 costs you points, because nobody reaches it. That single line does more than any advice about "front-loading the payoff".
- "Can we re-shoot one shot only" is the cheapest use of this sheet. Section C deliberately offers no "start over" option.
- Where the rule comes from: scoring only observable behaviour and giving politeness a zero is how we score seller interviews. It transfers cleanly, because both fail the same way — by reading courtesy as signal.
The template in full
The whole thing is below. Select and copy it, or use the download button above.
# Creative acceptance scorecard > Score the video you got back **before** you spend money on it. > Rule borrowed from user research: only observable things score. "It looks nice" is zero. Video: [file / link] · Creator: [name] · SKU: [name] · Date: [date] · Scored by: [name] ## A. Brief compliance (pass/fail — any fail sends it back) | # | Check | Pass? | Note | |---|---|---|---| | A1 | The hook is said verbatim in the first 3 seconds | ☐ | | | A2 | Nothing from the "do not say" list appears in speech | ☐ | | | A3 | Nothing from the "do not say" list appears in captions | ☐ | | | A4 | No scales, tape measures, body measurements, or pinching fat | ☐ | | | A5 | Before/after (if used) changed exactly one variable | ☐ | | | A6 | Aspect and safe area are correct | ☐ | | | A7 | AI-generated content is disclosed, if applicable | ☐ | | **Any unchecked box above = send back for a re-shoot or a re-edit. Do not "fix it in the caption".** ## B. Score (0–10) | Points | Observable thing | |---|---| | +3 | The proof shot exists, is one take, and is legible on a phone at arm's length | | +2 | The first 3 seconds contain a physical action, not a talking head | | +2 | The claim made on screen is something the garment actually does | | +1 | The size worn is stated, with the wearer's height/weight or usual size | | +1 | Audio is usable without music (you can hear the words) | | +1 | The video still makes sense with the sound off | | −2 | The strongest moment is after second 15 (nobody gets there) | | −2 | The product is only visible flat-lay / on a hanger, never worn in motion | | −1 | The creator reads the script instead of talking | | −1 | The caption repeats the voiceover word for word | **Reading**: 7+ run it · 4–6 run it in the cheapest test cell only · ≤3 do not spend on it. ## C. What we do next - [ ] Runs as A/B cell: [which cell / which hook it is testing] - [ ] Re-cut needed: [what exactly] - [ ] Re-shoot needed: [which shot only — never "do it all again"] - [ ] Pay / repost / send the next sample ## D. Notes back to the creator Say what to keep, not just what to fix. One line each: - Keep: [what worked] - Change: [one thing, the most important one] --- These risk flags are an assisted check. They are not a compliance ruling and not legal advice — the platform’s review and your own legal judgment decide. Risk-term list version 2026-08-15c. Template published by Preshoot — free to copy, edit and use commercially.
Other templates
FAQ
Why score before spending?
Because once it is running you cannot tell bad creative from bad targeting. Gate out the obviously wasteful cuts first; the remaining differences are the ones worth attributing.
Does 7+ mean it will win?
No. This sheet blocks obvious waste; it does not predict winners. Winning is measured by the A/B matrix and the review sheet.
Will creators feel nitpicked?
Not if you actually fill in section D — what to keep, and the single most important change. Feedback that only lists faults produces defensiveness; feedback that starts with what worked produces revisions.
Why penalise captions that repeat the voiceover?
Because the words on screen and the words in your ears carry the same payload, which wastes a channel. Captions should carry the half the voiceover did not say.