# Fictional example output

| Placement | Finding | Quantified evidence | Proposed next check |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| games.example | Suitability unknown; the hostname does not verify games content. Efficiency warrants review | Display: 10,000 impressions, $120 spend, 0 mature purchases; CPA undefined | Obtain actual content/category evidence against the supplied Games ban, verify normalized identity and supported Display exclusion scope, then consider a narrow exclusion only if the conflict is confirmed |
| video.example/v1 | Unknown suitability and efficiency | PMax: 8,000 impressions; cost/outcomes unavailable | Obtain suitability evidence and supported exclusion control if needed |

$120 is observed spend exposure, not guaranteed savings. The supplied suitability rule does not establish this website's category, and zero observed purchases alone does not require exclusion. No cost, CPA, fraud claim, or exclusion recommendation is supportable for the PMax row from impressions alone. A missing cost is not zero. No blanket app-category block or account-wide exclusion is justified. Proposal only; nothing applied.