Your ad was rejected. Find out what most likely caused it — with the evidence.
MARI reads your creative, copy, landing page and rejection notice, then produces a ranked set of likely contributing factors, each one quoting the exact text or image detail behind it. Built for agencies and media buyers who have to explain the problem to a client this afternoon.
What we can analyse
- Ad copy, headline and description as submitted
- Creative imagery, including text embedded in the image
- Your landing page, its redirect chain and what it actually says
- What changed between a version that was approved and one that was not
- Industry and offer context that raises review scrutiny
What nobody outside Meta can see
- Meta's internal classifier scores
- Account-level trust signals and full enforcement history
- Signals from connected pages, domains and payment methods
- Reviewer notes and unpublished heuristics
So we do not claim to know why Meta acted. Every report separates what the evidence supports from what it cannot settle, and says which is which.
How a diagnosis is built
Eight stages. The deterministic checks run before any interpretation, so findings you can verify yourself are never mixed up with findings that required judgement.
01
Extract
Read the creative and the rejection notice into text, including claims embedded in the image.
02
Fetch
Load your destination the way a reviewer would, following every redirect.
03
Diff
Compare against a previously approved version — the strongest signal available.
04
Scan
Run high-precision rules that flag known phrasings with the exact text quoted.
05
Ground
Retrieve the policy clauses those hits implicate, from a dated snapshot.
06
Reason
Generate ranked hypotheses, each citing evidence, each with a confidence.
07
Calibrate
Re-weight by signal family and cap confidence by how complete your evidence was.
08
Track
Record what you changed and whether the resubmission was approved.
The signals we weigh
Findings are grouped into signal families and weighted by how much each family actually explains enforcement — so a confident finding in a weak family never outranks a solid one in a strong family.
Policy language
Personal-attribute phrasing, prohibited claims, deceptive or absolute language in the ad text.
1.00
weight
Creative semantics
What the image or video implies: before/after framing, sensitive imagery, unrealistic outcomes, embedded text.
1.00
weight
Industry sensitivity
Elevated scrutiny categories: financial services, health, employment, housing, crypto, dating.
0.85
weight
Landing-page mismatch
The destination promises something different from, or stronger than, the ad.
1.00
weight
Business identity
Inconsistencies between the advertiser, the page, the offer and the destination.
0.70
weight
Behaviour & context
Patterns the advertiser reports: repeated resubmissions, bulk duplication, prior enforcement.
0.70
weight
Version delta
What changed between a version that was approved and the one that was rejected. The single strongest available signal.
1.25
weight
Account-level signals
Often not determinableRestriction type, enforcement history, connected assets. High impact, but rarely visible from outside Meta.
1.00
weight