# Check Google Ads inquiry counts Canonical page: https://agents.paretoid.com/workflows/check-google-ads-inquiry-counts/ Category: Google Ads Practice relevance: cross-practice. A general operational method. Review the stated tool and jurisdiction limits before use. Jurisdiction/provider scope: Review conversion definitions and repeated-event risks before changing measurement settings. Status: Proposed / not tested. The public discussion supports the problem; the method source supports only the documented features. No outcome from this adapted recipe has been verified. Verification: The linked sources support the complaint and documented method components. We have not run this recipe or verified its results. The example below is synthetic, not a customer result. ## The problem Review conversion definitions and repeated-event risks before changing measurement settings. Why it matters: Different conversion definitions can make inquiry counts difficult to compare and may affect bidding decisions. Reviewing settings and synthetic event behavior helps separate measurement defects from legitimate attribution or timing differences. ## Sources and evidence - pain: [Pain evidence: Public discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/DigitalMarketing/comments/1te14nx/google_ads_conversions_not_matching_ga4_for_law/) ; original post 2026-05-15, law-firm-site operator/marketer (role not independently verified): “Ads show 40 conversions, GA4 only 15.” First-person tracking-mismatch report. Duplicate events and One/Every settings are diagnostic hypotheses, not established causes; attribution, event scope and time windows can legitimately differ. - method: [Method: Google Ads conversion counting](https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/3438531?hl=en) Google distinguishes one-per-click counting from event or transaction deduplication. One does not deduplicate a person across clicks or separate actions. - method: [Method: Google Ads conversion counting · supporting guide 2](https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/6386790?app=1&hl=en) Additional official capability reference. It does not validate the complete proposed recipe. Source checked: October 15, 2026. Pain reports are self-reported and identities are unverified. Method documentation supports components, not a tested end-to-end workflow. ## Suggested approach Start when: New campaign/tag release or monthly QA 1. inspect conversion-action definitions, count setting, primary/secondary designation and synthetic repeated-submission behavior 2. Keep row or page references and mark missing or ambiguous evidence. Do not apply the suggested changes. 3. The responsible staff member checks the draft against the source records and approves any separate action. ## What you need - Existing authorized access to the correct source account and records; no new login, credentials, installation or permission grant is included. - Responsible lawyer/operations reviewer approves scope, definitions and any later action. - AI optional; use only approved minimized data and retain originals separately. - Use synthetic inputs first. Keep real data in firm-approved accounts and processing, with appropriate access, confidentiality and retention controls. Aliases alone do not anonymize records. Never paste credentials, API keys or unnecessary client details. ## How to use Documentation-checked component path; proposed workflow, not tested - Aggregate counts cannot prove real inquiries or deduplication. No production-event test performed. Access and setup: - The live account, entitlement, exact headers, records and field coverage have not been observed. ### 1. Read conversion-action definitions and settings Tool: Google Ads Location: Goals > Conversions > Summary > selected conversion action > settings/details Capture actual action name/source, primary/secondary status, Count, windows and the business-event definition. If Edit settings is needed to view Count, inspect without changing or saving. Record whether the attribution setting makes a control managed in Analytics. Expected output: Conversion-action settings ledger with screenshots. Next step: Pair each action with its documented website/CRM event, not merely a friendly name. Check before continuing: One counts per ad click/action, not unique people across all clicks/actions. Changing it affects future reporting. Execution status: Public official documentation checked 2026-10-15; no login, export, live query, import, installation, configuration, message or client workflow was executed. Step documentation: https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/3438531?hl=en https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/3123169?hl=en https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/2375435?hl=en ### 2. Download the actual aggregate reports Tool: Google Ads and GA4 Location: Ads relevant statistics table > selected date/columns > Download > Excel CSV/XLSX; GA4 Reports > selected existing report > Share this report > Download File > Download CSV Preserve original reports and date/filter/timezone context. Record whether Ads uses interaction-date or conversion-time columns and which action/metric the GA4 report shows; capture threshold/coverage warnings. Expected output: Native report exports with their own metric definitions. Next step: Manually map only genuinely comparable action/metric definitions into AggregateCounts. Check before continuing: An Ads/GA4 total mismatch is not proof of duplicate firing. Attribution date, windows, imports and primary/secondary scopes can differ. Execution status: Public official documentation checked 2026-10-15; no login, export, live query, import, installation, configuration, message or client workflow was executed. Step documentation: https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/2404176?hl=en https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/9317657?hl=en https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/2375435?hl=en ### 3. Acquire implementation evidence safely Tool: Existing tag configuration and an approved test record Location: GTM existing container/workspace configuration; future controlled test: Workspace > Preview > Tag Assistant For this read-only recipe use already recorded configuration/test evidence, or return a test-plan blocker. A separately approved technician can later inspect event order in Tag Assistant using a synthetic isolated test path. No preview session or form submission is run here. Expected output: Existing tag-to-event map and evidence, or a synthetic test plan. Next step: Provide only tag/event labels, counts and non-identifying IDs to analysis. Check before continuing: Preview is not guaranteed side-effect-free: tags/forms may still send data. Transaction IDs are not reported in Ads, so a report cannot prove deduplication; unique IDs must be verified in implementation/test evidence. Execution status: Public official documentation checked 2026-10-15; no login, export, live query, import, installation, configuration, message or client workflow was executed. Step documentation: https://support.google.com/tagmanager/answer/6107056?hl=en https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/6386790?hl=en ### 4. Make the checked, minimized handoff Tool: Excel / source-record reviewer Location: Restricted original workbook > separate analysis workbook > Scope worksheet Build Actions, AggregateCounts and ExistingTests with actual definitions. Scope includes attribution/date differences and untested repeat-submit scenarios. Keep untouched original exports/screenshots and the identifying source map in restricted firm storage. Build a separate minimized analysis file; do not hide raw client data on another tab. Include the complete Scope/coverage note in the AI-visible workbook or prompt. Use aliases and administrative metadata only. Unknown is not zero, false, completed or absent. Expected output: Actions(action_alias,event_definition,source,count_setting,primary_secondary,window,evidence_ref); AggregateCounts(system,metric,period,count,scope_ref); ExistingTests(test_id,expected_event,observed_events,evidence_ref) Next step: Format each approved range as a named table. Carry source-row references and coverage into the analysis workbook. Check before continuing: Every field has an observed source or an explicit missing reason; staff assignments are marked editorial, not native. Execution status: Public official documentation checked 2026-10-15; no login, export, live query, import, installation, configuration, message or client workflow was executed. Step documentation: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/excel/merge-queries-power-query https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/3438531?hl=en ### 5. Ask AI to inspect the checked inputs Tool: Excel Copilot, optional Location: Analysis workbook > Copilot icon at lower right > Chat only Open the minimized workbook containing the named tables and Scope. Paste the exact prompt; if unavailable, perform the same rule checks manually. Prompt: ```text Use Actions, AggregateCounts, ExistingTests and Scope. First identify scope/date/attribution differences that prevent comparison. Separate confirmed wrong-event wiring from suspected repeated firing and untested overlaps between native/imported actions. Explain One versus Every without equating either with person-level deduplication. Return evidence, hypothesis, smallest synthetic test and risk of a proposed change. No missing transaction ID may be inferred from an Ads export. Do not modify goals, tags, bidding or upload personal data. ``` Expected output: Measurement audit and controlled synthetic test plan, not a diagnosed cause without evidence. Next step: Copy checked results into a new Review sheet, retaining source references and unresolved blockers. Check before continuing: For each confirmed defect require specific implementation/test evidence; no invented event sequence. Execution status: Public official documentation checked 2026-10-15; no login, export, live query, import, installation, configuration, message or client workflow was executed. Step documentation: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/excel/copilot/get-started-with-copilot-in-excel ### 6. Human review and final action Tool: Responsible firm reviewer Location: Internal Review worksheet / review document Marketer and website owner review evidence and approve any isolated test or fix with rollback planning. Retain unknown causes where tests are absent. Expected output: Reviewed conversion-count audit. Next step: Only a separately authorized operator edits source tags/goals; no production tests or changes performed. Check before continuing: Primary-goal changes can affect bidding. Never send real prospect data as a test. Execution status: Public official documentation checked 2026-10-15; no login, export, live query, import, installation, configuration, message or client workflow was executed. Step documentation: https://support.google.com/tagmanager/answer/6107056?hl=en https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/3438531?hl=en ## What you will get measurement-review.csv: check_id, action_ids, observation, hypothesis, required_test, expected_result, reviewer; plus a proposed rollback plan ## Human review and limits Do not send real prospect data during tests. Changing primary goals can affect bidding; any fix needs explicit review and rollback planning. The assistant drafts or reports only. Check source records and review the output before a human performs any separately approved send or change. No automatic legal decision, money movement, account connection or publication is included. What to measure: During the pilot, count findings confirmed by the reviewer, false alarms, and missing-input cases. Do not infer time or money saved. ## Original prepared-input schema conversion-actions.csv: action_id, source, event_definition, count_setting, primary_or_secondary, attribution_model, conversion_window, timezone measurement-plan.txt: what counts as an inquiry, staging access, tag/configuration evidence, approved reviewer synthetic-test-plan.csv: test_id, action_ids, event_sequence, expected_business_inquiries; use no real prospect identifiers Synthetic example input: ```text T1: one test inquiry fires two configured conversion actions T2: one page view is labeled an inquiry without a submission T3: Ads and Analytics use different windows and attribution models ``` Expected synthetic output: ```text T1: overlapping-action risk for testing T2: definition mismatch T3: possible legitimate difference; compare definitions before diagnosing a defect ``` Failure check: Simulate two clicks and two actions for the same synthetic person. Do not claim the One setting deduplicates people across clicks or actions. ## Starter files Native blank scaffolds and original synthetic examples may use different schemas. Follow NATIVE-INPUT-MAPPING where supplied. These files do not connect accounts or install automation. - [Download starter kit](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g20-starter-kit.zip) — All inputs, synthetic examples and review notes in one ZIP. No automation is installed. - [Start here: get the sources and prepare the review](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g20/START-HERE.txt) — Documentation-checked acquisition, explicit manual mapping, exact prompts and human review limits - [Setup and review checklist](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g20/README.txt) — Required inputs, file use, review steps and limits - [Conversion actions blank CSV](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g20/conversion-actions-template.csv) — Blank input headers for conversion-actions.csv - [Conversion actions synthetic example](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g20/conversion-actions-example.csv) — Synthetic test records for conversion-actions.csv - [Synthetic test plan blank CSV](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g20/synthetic-test-plan-template.csv) — Blank input headers for synthetic-test-plan.csv - [Synthetic test plan synthetic example](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g20/synthetic-test-plan-example.csv) — Synthetic test records for synthetic-test-plan.csv - [Measurement plan template](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g20/measurement-plan-template.txt) — Required policy or native-input preparation aid; synthetic when marked example - [Measurement plan example](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g20/measurement-plan-example.txt) — Required policy or native-input preparation aid; synthetic when marked example - [Synthetic example expected results](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g20/expected-results.txt) — Compare a pilot result with the planted exceptions - [Native input scaffold: Actions](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g20/native-actions-template.csv) — Empty editorial table for Actions; populate from verified source evidence after reviewed mapping; not a native export - [Native input scaffold: AggregateCounts](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g20/native-aggregatecounts-template.csv) — Empty editorial table for AggregateCounts; populate from verified source evidence after reviewed mapping; not a native export - [Native input scaffold: ExistingTests](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g20/native-existingtests-template.csv) — Empty editorial table for ExistingTests; populate from verified source evidence after reviewed mapping; not a native export - [Native input scaffold: Scope](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g20/native-scope-template.txt) — Approved text input for Scope; complete from verified evidence and include in the AI-visible packet - [Native input mapping and scope guide](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g20/NATIVE-INPUT-MAPPING.txt) — Old-file-to-native-input compatibility map, acquisition requirements, privacy and blocking gates ## Optional original prepared-input prompt Destination: Your firm-approved AI assistant · prepared files This original prompt uses its own prepared-input schema. Do not mix it with native-step tables without the supplied mapping. ```text Audit these conversion settings against our definition of a unique inquiry. Identify page views masquerading as inquiries, repeat-event risk and overlapping imported/native actions. Explain what One versus Every does and does not solve. Separate legitimate attribution/time-window differences from suspected defects. Produce synthetic tests and a review-ready correction plan; do not change bidding goals or claim deduplication without testing. INPUTS conversion-actions.csv: action_id, source, event_definition, count_setting, primary_or_secondary, attribution_model, conversion_window, timezone measurement-plan.txt: what counts as an inquiry, staging access, tag/configuration evidence, approved reviewer synthetic-test-plan.csv: test_id, action_ids, event_sequence, expected_business_inquiries; use no real prospect identifiers OUTPUT measurement-review.csv: check_id, action_ids, observation, hypothesis, required_test, expected_result, reviewer; plus a proposed rollback plan Use only the supplied synthetic or firm-approved inputs. Cite source row or page IDs for each finding. Keep unknowns unresolved. Return a draft for the responsible staff reviewer. Do not send messages, connect accounts, change records, move money, or make legal decisions. Keep source files unchanged. If an input or permission is missing, list what is needed and stop that check. ``` Proposed / not tested · editorial prompt Published by Law Firm Agents. Proposed adaptation; not tested. Not legal advice.