Live Demo · Marketing Agent

Signal QA before campaign launch

Watch the Marketing Agent validate a multi-channel launch — UTMs, conversion events, audience overlap — and hold the go-live on two signal gaps.

AgentPrime Marketing Agent
healthy
  • .01 Launches QA'd MTD 31 campaigns 0 signal misses
  • .02 Signal coverage 94% +28pp QoQ
  • .03 Audience overlap 12% of in-flight audiences
  • .04 Pre-launch holds 6 this week all resolved before go-live
Operating across
  • Segment
  • Snowflake
  • Meta
  • Google Ads
  • Iterable

The Scenario

A spring campaign is scheduled to go live in two hours across paid social, email, and display. Twelve audience segments, four creative variants, three landing pages. The Marketing Agent QA's the whole launch before anyone clicks the go button.

Company
Consumer brand · 200M+ annual sessions · 9 paid channels
Stack
Segment · Snowflake · Meta · Google Ads · Iterable

The Workflow

7 frames. The agent's work, end-to-end, in 1 minute 4 seconds.

Queue 1:14 PM · Iterable Campaign #SP-2204

Agent pulls the campaign brief, the launch spec, the audience definitions, and the conversion goals. Cross-references the launch checklist.

Campaign
Spring · Repeat-Buyer Activation
Channels
Meta · Google · Iterable · Display
Audiences
12 segments
Creative variants
4
Launch target
3:00 PM ET
Reasoning trace

Agent runs the standard pre-launch battery — UTM hygiene, conversion event mapping, audience overlap, holdout integrity, brand-safety lists, deliverability snapshot.

  1. 1 UTM hygiene: 47 of 48 destination URLs valid — 1 typo in a display tag.
  2. 2 Conversion events: purchase + signup mapped to all destinations; one Meta event missing the LTV parameter.
  3. 3 Audience overlap: two segments (Active-30 and Repeat-60) share 41% of users — risk of double exposure.
Decision Policy: MKT-LAUNCH-001 · Pre-launch signal QA

Five of six checks clear. The display UTM typo and the missing Meta LTV parameter could pass, but the audience overlap would meaningfully distort attribution. Recommend hold.

  • Required fix: dedupe Active-30 and Repeat-60 segments before launch (reduces overlap to <8%)
  • Required fix: add LTV parameter to Meta purchase event
  • Optional: fix display UTM typo (low-volume tag, attribution impact minimal)
Action → Linear · Snowflake · Iterable

Agent opens a Linear ticket per fix with the exact change required, drafts the audience SQL update, and attaches a one-click apply to Iterable.

Linear tickets
MKT-2204a (overlap) · MKT-2204b (LTV)
Audience SQL patch
Drafted · 6 lines
Iterable change
One-click apply (LTV param)
UTM typo
Logged as P3 · ship next sprint
Routed to
growth-eng@ · campaign-ops@
Action → Slack · #spring-launch

One message in #spring-launch. Two required fixes, both with patches drafted. Estimated time to resolve: 22 minutes.

Status
Hold · 2 required fixes
ETA to resolve
≈ 22 minutes
Estimated new launch
3:30 PM ET (30-min delay)
Alternative
Launch reduced scope · 10 of 12 segments
Recommendation
Hold + fix
Audit log 13:14:51
[2026-05-27 13:14:51]  mkt-agent  CAMPAIGN_QA  campaign=SP-2204  channels=[meta, google, iterable, display]  checks=6  pass=4  hold=2  fix_tickets=[MKT-2204a, MKT-2204b]  policy=MKT-LAUNCH-001  duration=64s
Queue 3:30 PM

Both patches applied. Re-run of the signal battery: 6 of 6 pass. Campaign launches 30 minutes after the original window, with clean attribution and no audience double-exposure.

Re-QA result
6 of 6 pass
Launched
12 segments · 4 variants · 3 channels
Attribution risk
Mitigated · overlap 7%
Pre-launch hold avoided
≈ $42K in distorted spend

Outcome at scale

10 days → 4 days

Across a full quarter this loop runs across every launch. Campaign-to-launch cycle time compresses while signal coverage climbs and attribution stays clean.

Book a Discovery Call