Agency deliverability audit template
A repeatable audit structure for agencies reviewing client sender domains, templates, lists, DMARC, and monitoring.
Audit sections
- Inventory every system that sends as the client domain.
- Check SPF, DKIM, DMARC, alignment, policy strength, and DKIM selectors.
- Check PTR, HELO, MX, TLS, DNSBLs, and sending domain health.
- Run a deliverability test for each critical template.
- Validate active campaign lists and segment risky recipients.
- Review DMARC aggregate reports for unknown senders.
- Document fixes, owners, and re-test dates.
Client-facing deliverable
| Section | Evidence | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
| Authentication | SPF/DKIM/DMARC pass or fail with alignment | Fix gates first |
| Infrastructure | PTR, HELO, TLS, DNSBL, MX | Escalate provider-owned issues |
| Content | Headers, MIME, unsubscribe, links | Fix template-level problems |
| List | Invalid, risky, catch-all, unknown | Suppress and segment |
| Monitoring | DMARC sources and domain scans | Review monthly |
For deeper technical background, point clients to the existing reading your WillItInbox report guide and Google Postmaster Tools walkthrough.
Turn the audit into repeatable evidence
An agency audit should separate observed evidence from recommendations. Capture the sending domain, message sample, provider, test timestamp, DNS answers, authentication identifiers, major content findings, list-quality assumptions, and unresolved access gaps. This makes the report defensible and gives the next audit a baseline instead of starting from screenshots and memory.
Client-ready audit flow
- 01
Confirm scope
List domains, streams, providers, and campaigns included in the engagement.
- 02
Collect evidence
Run message, domain, validation, and DMARC checks without mixing observations from different senders.
- 03
Prioritize
Rank authentication and list-risk failures before cosmetic content warnings.
- 04
Retest
Repeat the same checks after remediation and record what changed.
Use the sample deliverability report as the evidence model and the agency use case for the client workflow. Avoid promising inbox placement; report the controlled evidence and its limitations.
For every recommendation, name the owner, expected evidence after the fix, and retest date. This turns a static audit into a remediation plan and prevents DNS, list, and provider changes from being marked complete without verification.
Sources reviewed
- WillItInbox documentation(product)
Factual review: June 13, 2026 by WillItInbox Editorial.
Keep reading