The ROCO Standard defines minimum deliverables as the set of technical and strategic evidence—such as prioritized audits, change logs, and measurement plans—that guarantees the execution of real and transparent work. To comply with this Roco Agency standard, each document must certify the diagnosis of a problem, proof of its implementation, and its direct impact on business objectives. In this guide, you will learn how to audit these artifacts to differentiate results-oriented management from a mere cosmetic report, ensuring the complete traceability of your digital investment.
What do we mean by minimum deliverables?
In SEO and Ads projects, "minimum deliverables" doesn't refer to the number of completed tasks, but rather to clear evidence of value: artifacts that demonstrate diagnosis, prioritization, execution, and traceability. A minimum deliverable should allow a client to answer three questions: what was detected, why it was prioritized, and how it was implemented. This applies to both on-site technical interventions and changes to campaigns and landing pages. Transparency is key: access to accounts, asset ownership, and decision logs.
Deliverables also serve to assess whether the provider is impact-oriented: measured conversions, tested hypotheses, and documented learning. For example, in a strategy to increase conversions, the deliverable isn't "50 updated meta tags," but rather "a prioritized list of 10 pages with impact estimates, changes implemented with diffs, and CTR improvement observed over X weeks." A client can compare this type of deliverable with their business objective and demand evidence that goes beyond mere volume.
List of verifiable minimum deliverables
Below we explain the deliverables that should form the basis of any serious SEO and Google Ads service, and what minimum evidence to request for each:
- Technical audit with prioritized findingsReport with findings categorized by impact/effort, examples of affected URLs, and screenshots or commands. Request the audit source and the criteria used.
- Backlog and prioritized roadmap: ordered backlog (tickets or sheet) linked to target metrics with deadlines and responsible parties.
- Changes implemented with evidence: diffs, staging/production captures, merge logs, closed tickets, and before/after URLs.
- Reporting with decisionsReports that not only measure traffic, but also show decisions made (hypotheses, A/B testing, bid adjustments) and the next action plan.
- Tracking documentation: definition of events, instrumentation plan, firing tests and QA logs that demonstrate that conversions are recorded correctly.
- Landing QA and CRO: QA checklist, usability test results, and implemented changes with their impact on key metrics.
How to check without being a technician
A client doesn't need to know how to interpret a log to audit minimum deliverables. Request concrete artifacts and focus on three accessible signals: traceability (tickets or records with dates), visual evidence (screenshots or diffs), and results linked to metrics (conversions, CTR, impressions). If there are no tickets, request a spreadsheet where each row represents a task with its status, responsible party, closing date, and a link to the proof (screenshot or URL).
It's also helpful to require that significant changes be communicated with a paragraph explaining the business hypothesis, the target metric, and the evidence gathered. This short, readable summary allows for auditing the impact without analyzing technical logs.
Proof of work vs. cosmetic reporting
The difference between proof of work and cosmetic reporting lies in the presence of verifiable artifacts. Cosmetic reporting typically presents dashboards with aggregated metrics and flashy charts without showing the connection between diagnosis, action, and outcome. In contrast, proof of work includes code or CMS diffs, tickets with comments, change logs, and annotations that explain why an action was taken.
Specific examples of proof of work: A version control diff showing the modification of canonical tags, a Jira ticket linking to the task and the staging test, or a Google Tag Manager log showing that a purchase event started sending data on day X. These artifacts allow us to verify that not only was something done, but that it was the action linked to the observed result.
Typical elements of cosmetic reporting
Warning signs: generic dashboard images without context, metric tables without dates or hypothesis comparisons, and documents that mix business objectives with technical KPIs without showing the execution pipeline. Always ask for the "how" and the "proof" behind any positive metric.
In Ads campaigns, for example, a cosmetic report shows an increase in impressions and clicks, while the proof of work includes the history of campaign structure changes, bidding rules applied, and experiments performed with their results.
Transparency standards you should demand
Transparency isn't about opening a dashboard; it's about providing controlled access, transferring ownership of assets, and maintaining traceability of decisions. We recommend requesting the following minimum from the supplier:
- Initially read-only access and scalable roles to review changes.
- Documented ownership of accounts and assets: who is the administrative owner and how it is transferred.
- Decision record: brief minutes or notes on tickets that explain why an action was taken.
This prevents surprises at the end of the contractual relationship and facilitates subsequent audits. If a provider is reluctant to grant access to accounts, it's a red flag for further investigation. A professional approach incorporates regular access reviews and controls that allow for auditing without exposing sensitive credentials.
How to audit minimum deliverables without technical knowledge
Non-technical auditing involves requesting concrete evidence and using simple criteria: correspondence between hypotheses and tests, date and authorship of changes, and related metrics. Always request three types of deliverables for each initiative: (1) diagnosis (why), (2) implementation (what was done), and (3) results (what changed).
If you work with content or structural SEO, require a readable checklist: affected URLs, before/after screenshots, and a record of when Google indexed the change, if applicable. For Ads, request a screenshot of the account's change history, experiment settings, and data segmented by before and after periods.
To guide you, review specific cases and templates: a good provider shares their audit and explains the expected impacts in business terms. If you need examples of processes and complementary services, see how we integrate positioning into the workflows of Agencia Roco in our service. web positioning which explains the relationship between on-page SEO and business objectives.
Boost your business with Agencia Roco
Receive a free consultation to identify opportunities in your positioning, campaigns, and sales funnel. We'll provide you with a prioritized plan to attract leads and convert them into customers.
Accessible technical evidence
For non-technical users, some artifacts may seem cryptic, but there are always ways to present understandable evidence: screenshots of changes in the CMS, commit snippets (diffs) with annotations of who made the changes and why, and links to tickets that explain the logic. Require that each major change be accompanied by a brief, business-oriented explanatory comment.
When it comes to tracking, evidence can be a screenshot of an analytics tool's real-time view showing an event that is now triggering, as well as a simple table comparing conversions before and after implementation. If you'd like to delve deeper into what to review in a technical audit, see the breakdown we use in the technical SEO audit, where we detail key elements and priority levels.
Practical example of understandable evidence
Let's assume the H structure is optimized on a series of landing pages to improve semantic relevance. The minimum evidence would be: (1) a list of URLs with H before/after in screenshots, (2) a ticket with the list of changes and the person responsible, (3) a measurement of CTR or time on page compared over 30 days. This test folder allows for validation without detailed HTML knowledge.
Backlog, roadmap and prioritization
A backlog without prioritization is just a list. The minimum deliverable should be a backlog prioritized by impact and effort, with assigned responsibilities and deadlines. Request that the vendor use a simple structure (e.g., Low/Medium/High for impact and estimated effort in hours) and document the hypothesis associated with each item: what is expected to change in the metric and why.
A roadmap should show quarterly milestones, dependencies, and success criteria. This makes it easier to audit progress: if an item is marked as completed, there should be supporting evidence (screenshot, URL, ticket). The quality of the backlog is measured by the clarity of the hypothesis and the traceability from diagnosis to outcome measurement.
| Deliverable | Minimum content | How to audit without being a technician |
|---|---|---|
| Technical audit | Findings by impact, example URLs, captures, or commands | Review 2 examples with capture and explanation of impact |
| Backlog and roadmap | Tickets, responsible parties, dates, priority | Request a sheet with the status and links to tests. |
| Changes implemented | Diffs, screenshots, URLs before/after | View 1 URL before/after and associated ticket |
Traceability mechanisms: tickets, diffs and logs
Traceability mechanisms are the backbone of proof-of-work. A ticket documents the decision; a diff proves the modification; a log shows the execution or firing of the tracking. It requires that tickets not be just titles: they must contain a description, hypotheses, steps to reproduce, evidence, and a closing statement with the result. A commit or diff associated with the ticket connects the decision to the implementation.
In ecosystems without public version control, it requires screenshots of the deployment tool or confirmation emails of the production upload, including the date and responsible party. For Google Ads, it requires a downloadable change history or screenshots of the history showing bid adjustments and experiments, and links each change to a hypothesis in the backlog.
Work test: concrete examples
Example 1: Canonical tag change for 10 URLs. Evidence: ticket with list of URLs, diff in the CMS, production capture 24 hours later, and indexing report. Example 2: A/B test on landing page. Evidence: experiment configuration in the tool, metrics segmented by variant, and decision documented in the ticket closure.
Report with decisions and next steps
A useful report doesn't repeat metrics; it explains decisions. It should include: an executive summary with validated hypotheses, a list of completed actions with links to evidence, and a prioritized next-step plan. It also requires interpretation in business terms: what the changes mean for the funnel and for the cost of acquisition.
It's common to receive reports with many tables; what's truly valuable is when those tables are linked to a narrative that justifies the investment. If a provider shows a decrease in CPA, ask them to specify which action contributed to the improvement and provide the corresponding evidence (ticket, diff, tracking proof). In campaigns, a good report connects changes in structure and bids with conversion segments and traffic quality.
Minimum deliverables for Google Ads and measurement
In the world of Google Ads, the minimum deliverables include a proposed account structure, a change history, documented experiments, and a tracking matrix that explains how conversions and micro-conversions are measured. The documentation should allow for the replication of how leads are measured and attributed.
If you work with a digital marketing agency Google Ads, It requests a list of campaigns and activated experiments, with screenshots of the results for each variant and the conclusions that motivated the next iteration. Tracking and attribution are critical: it requires a table with events, categories, and firing tests.
Boost your business with Agencia Roco
Receive a free consultation to identify opportunities in your positioning, campaigns, and sales funnel. We'll provide you with a prioritized plan to attract leads and convert them into customers.
How to demand evidence and avoid misunderstandings
Establish acceptance criteria from the outset: what documents are submitted, in what format, and with what level of detail. Define minimum templates for audits, tickets, and reports. For example, a ticket closure template should include: a summary of hypotheses, steps implemented, evidence (screenshots/diffs), before/after metrics, and lessons learned.
It also establishes regular checkpoints where the supplier presents artifacts. This reduces the likelihood of the work being limited to superficial adjustments and requires each change to be justified with a hypothesis and evidence. Standardization facilitates internal audits and decision-making by the marketing or management team.
Measure impact, not volume
The standard to demand is not the number of tickets closed, but the impact and the evidence. Prioritize tasks that add value per visitor or lead and require that each item have an estimate of the expected benefit. A minimum deliverable includes that estimate and the actual result, indicating whether the hypothesis was valid.
When negotiating with vendors, ask for examples of previous work that demonstrate full traceability: diagnosis, backlog, execution (with diffs/tickets), and measured results. If they ask for references, request that they show you the type of evidence they provide, not just aggregated metrics.
Quick checklist for auditing minimum deliverables
Before approving deliverables, use this simple checklist: (1) There is a ticket or record with a date; (2) There is visual evidence (screenshot/diff); (3) The task is linked to a target metric; (4) There is a closure with results and lessons learned; (5) The client has access to the relevant assets. If any of these points are missing, request that they be completed.
When applying this checklist, prioritize requesting the three essential artifacts: diagnosis, execution, and outcome. This structure avoids debates about technical terminology because the focus is on business evidence.
Summary of actions for clients
Actions that any client can take immediately: define acceptance criteria, require tickets with supporting evidence, request diffs or screenshots, request reports with decisions, and confirm asset ownership. These measures minimize risks and align the supplier with evidence of impact.
As a general rule, when a deliverable cannot be verified with a ticket, visual evidence, and measured results, it does not meet the minimum deliverable definition. Working with this standard facilitates objective, data-driven discussions.
How to choose a supplier that provides proof of work?
Look for providers that offer clear traceability processes: ticketing, version control for changes, audit templates, and reports that link actions to metrics. Avoid those who only deliver dashboards or PDFs with metrics but no associated evidence. And remember: trust is built on transparency in access to and ownership of assets.
If needed, our practical recommendation is to request a quick meeting to review a pilot deliverable and apply the 5-point checklist. A pilot reveals the documentation culture and allows you to decide whether to continue with an evidence-based relationship.
Español de Colombia 
English 
