The Product/UX Diagnostic is the smallest engagement I sell: one user goal across up to five screens or states, 5–10 prioritized findings, and the three actions worth taking first, delivered next business day as a written report. No meeting, no revision round. Every report is written from the same template, and Josue reviews every deliverable before it is sent. Here is what that template forces the report to contain.

1. Client and scope

The report opens by restating what was agreed: the product, the one user goal, the screens or states inside the boundary, and the outcome you said matters. This is not filler. It is the contract the findings are judged against. If a finding is outside that boundary it does not appear, and if the boundary turned out to be wrong, the report says so instead of stretching.

2. Executive summary

Two things, and only two: a one-sentence diagnosis, and the three actions worth taking first. A founder or head of product should be able to read this section and act without reading the rest. Everything below it exists to justify these three lines.

3. Method and limits

This section states plainly what the diagnostic is and is not. It is an expert review of the supplied experience. It is not user research, usability testing, an accessibility certification, a legal or compliance review, or a guarantee of commercial results.

It lists the evidence that was used: the supplied URL, prototype or screenshots; the user goal and business outcome you gave me; direct inspection of the agreed experience. And it lists what was not assessed: analytics or behavioural data, competitor research, engineering feasibility or estimates, and any screens, roles or flows outside the agreed scope.

Why this matters to you: a review that hides its limits is asking you to trust its confidence. A review that states them is asking you to trust its evidence. Only the second kind is worth paying for.

4. Prioritized findings

Between five and ten findings, never more. Each one is written in the same four-part block:

  • Observation — what happens, described as your user would meet it.
  • Evidence — where in the supplied experience it is visible, so your team can go and look rather than take my word.
  • Why it matters — the cost to the user goal or the business outcome, in plain terms.
  • Recommended action — a concrete next move, bounded by what the evidence supports.

The cap is deliberate. A list of forty issues is a way of avoiding the ranking. Five to ten, in priority order, is a decision.

5. What to do next: Now, Next, Later

The findings are regrouped into three horizons. Now is what to fix in the current sprint. Next is what to plan for. Later is what to keep in view but not act on yet. This is the section your team actually works from.

6. Final quality gate and honesty footer

Before a report goes out it passes a written checklist, and it closes with an honesty footer that repeats the limits in one paragraph. If something could not be assessed because access was missing or the scope changed, that footer says it. The report never implies more coverage than it had.

How this relates to the deeper audits

The diagnostic answers one question: what should I fix first? If your question is different, the document is different. The $350 teardown walks one complete booking, onboarding or checkout flow and returns the five leaks costing you most, ranked, in 48 hours. The $550 critical-flow audit is the full single-flow review: every finding with severity, evidence, cost, fix and effort, an annotated walkthrough with timestamps, a "stop doing" list, and a recorded call. The sample report shows that format on a composite AI assistant. If you are not sure which depth you need, the diagnostic is the cheap way to find out, and the report will tell you honestly if it should have been something else.