Verified against ChatGPT · 2026-08-08
Wireframe a landing page section-by-section, anchored to the one action you want at each scroll depth
Produces a text-based wireframe of a landing page, section by section, where every block is justified by the one visitor decision it's meant to move — not a generic hero-features-testimonials-footer template filled in with your product name.
The prompt
Ready to copy — highlighted parts are example details you can swap.
Wireframe a landing page for the product below, one section at a time. I don't want a generic hero-features-testimonials-CTA template with the labels swapped for my product — every section needs to earn its place by moving the visitor one step closer to the specific action I want. PRODUCT AND OFFER A habit-tracking app; this page offers a 14-day free trial of the premium tier, no credit card required. VISITOR ARRIVING FROM A Google search ad triggered by the query 'habit tracker app for ADHD'. TARGET ACTION Start the 14-day free trial. OBJECTIONS THIS VISITOR LIKELY HAS Skeptical it will actually work for ADHD specifically, not just generic habit tracking; worried about another app they'll abandon in a week. PHASE 1 — DECIDE THE SECTION LIST Before wireframing anything, decide which sections this specific page actually needs given the traffic source and objections — do not default to a fixed six-section template. A visitor arriving from a bottom-of-funnel search ad who already knows what the product does needs a different section list than one arriving cold from a display ad. PHASE 2 — WIREFRAME EACH SECTION For each section, in scroll order, output: the one job this section does (in terms of a visitor decision it resolves, not "builds trust" vagueness), a text-based layout sketch (rows of blocks, e.g. [headline] / [subhead] / [CTA button] / [supporting image]), and which specific listed objection or piece of missing information it addresses. If a section doesn't map to a specific objection or the target action, cut it — do not include a section just because landing pages conventionally have one. PHASE 3 — CTA PLACEMENT AUDIT After wireframing all sections, list every place the target action's CTA appears down the page and justify each placement by what the visitor has just been convinced of at that scroll depth. WHAT NOT TO DO Do not write actual marketing copy for headlines — use bracketed placeholder descriptions of what each headline should communicate, since the wireframe is about structure, not final copy. Do not include a testimonials or social-proof section unless an objection or trust gap actually calls for it. OUTPUT FORMAT Section list with one-line justification for inclusion, then the full section-by-section wireframe from Phase 2, then the CTA placement audit from Phase 3.
Customize
Optional — swap in your own details for the highlighted parts above.
Why this works
GPT-5.1's default completion for "wireframe a landing page" is a memorized template shape (hero, three feature cards, testimonials, pricing, final CTA, footer) because that structure appears constantly in its training data as the canonical landing-page pattern — it will fill that template in competently regardless of whether every section is actually earning its place for this specific visitor, which is why forcing a Phase 1 decision about the section list before any layout work is the load-bearing instruction here: it makes the model justify inclusion against the traffic source and objections rather than defaulting to the template's full section count. Requiring each section to resolve a named objection or move toward the target action, and explicitly permitting a section to be cut if it doesn't, breaks the bias toward padding a landing page with conventional sections (testimonials, social proof) that exist because they're common, not because they're needed for this particular cold-versus-warm traffic scenario. Using bracketed placeholder descriptions instead of real headline copy keeps the wireframe honest about what it's actually specifying — structure and information sequencing — rather than letting persuasive copywriting substitute for a genuine structural decision, which is a common failure mode where a wireframe prompt drifts into producing finished marketing copy that looks impressive but hasn't actually reasoned about layout. The CTA placement audit as a separate final phase matters because CTA repetition down a long page is only effective when each instance is justified by what's just been resolved above it — auditing placements after the fact catches a CTA repeated out of habit rather than because the visitor has just been given a new reason to act.
What you get back
Section list: Hero (justify: visitor already searched the exact need, so hero can name the ADHD-specific angle immediately) / How it adapts to ADHD (justify: addresses the 'just generic habit tracking' objection) / What happens after day 14 (justify: addresses the abandonment fear directly) / CTA. No testimonials section — search-ad traffic with high intent doesn't need social proof before the first CTA, only after the second objection is resolved.
Verified against
ChatGPT GPT-5.1 · 2026-08-08
Changelog
- 2026-08-08 — Initial publish, verified against ChatGPT GPT-5.1.
Need this built into your business?
If a prompt isn't enough — branding & design, built and maintained for you — that's Scult's day job.
EXPLORE BRANDING & DESIGN
