Case study
[INSERT HEADLINE — e.g. “Cutting email QA from 4 hours to 30 minutes per campaign”]
[INSERT 1–2 SENTENCE SUBTITLE — who the analyst is (anonymized if needed), what program they QA, what changed.]
[INSERT]
Time saved per campaign
[INSERT]
Issues caught automatically
[INSERT]
False-positive rate
The setup
[INSERT 1–2 paragraphs: who the analyst is, the volume they handle (X clients × Y campaigns / month), what their pre-SendLint workflow looked like — the spreadsheets, the checklists, the hover-every-link grind. Concrete is better than vague.]
What used to slip through
[INSERT 2–3 concrete examples of issues that human QA missed before SendLint. Whitespace fidelity in legal copy. Trademark drift between deck and email. Outlook white-line risk on table rows with mixed borders. Each example anchors a real check that fires now.]
How SendLint changed the loop
[INSERT: paste-in to result-out time. Which features earn their keep (rule pipeline, AI Second-Reviewer, Brand Voice, dev brief share link). What the dev handoff looks like now vs the old Slack-and-spreadsheet dance.]
Where the time actually went
[INSERT: be honest. SendLint doesn’t eliminate QA — it shifts where the effort lives. Less link-hovering and copy-comparing, more time on the things humans are still better at: judgment calls on tone, layout aesthetics, the “is this on-brand enough” gut check.]
“[INSERT a verbatim quote — the line you’d repeat to a colleague after using the tool for a month. Short, specific, no marketing varnish.]”
[Name or anonymized title — e.g. “Senior QA analyst, agency in Toronto”]
See it on your own emails
Try the demo with any HTML email — no account needed.