Is It Out of Scope? — SEO & marketing
Is adding GDPR / cookie consent tooling out of scope for an SEO retainer?
Yes, as implementation work. Adjusting tracking to respect consent is a technical build, distinct from advising on how consent mode affects reporting.
This surfaces when a client realizes their analytics is firing regardless of cookie consent and asks the SEO team — the ones who set up the tracking originally — to make it consent-aware.
Is it out of scope?
Yes, as implementation work. Advising on how consent mode affects data completeness and reporting is within a retainer's analysis role; actually building the consent-tooling integration is technical implementation outside it.
Clause typically implicated
Clause typically implicated
Data protection clause→ — Distinguishes advising on the reporting impact of consent requirements (in scope) from implementing the consent-management tooling itself (technical build, out of scope).
Example contract wording
Example contract wording (illustrative, not legal advice)
I can flag how the missing consent mode is affecting your reporting data, but actually building the consent-tooling integration is implementation work — that'd need a developer to set up.
How MarginFlow flags it
MarginFlow flags consent-tooling implementation requests outside_scope on SEO contracts, while treating advising on the reporting impact of consent as within the retainer's analysis role.