Academy
Module: Try-on eligibility
Teach the team what try-on may claim, what it must not claim, and where setup lives.
Module goal: every launch teammate can explain try-on eligibility and image privacy in one minute without overclaiming fit. Required reading is the Help Center setup guide and the legal try-on privacy page. This module adds no medical or biometric claims.
Teach this sentence until it is automatic: Virtual Try-On is a visualization for eligible products. It is not an exact-fit assessment. Shopper images are handled as described on the public privacy page.
Why eligibility is a merchandising decision
Visualization quality and honesty depend on which products you mark in scope. Forcing try-on on items that are not eligible creates a toy. Excluding items that are eligible without telling support creates a different failure: staff invent workarounds. Merchandising should list types in and out of scope before anyone follows setup clicks.
Required reading
Do not paraphrase the legal page into a stronger retention, identity, or biometric story. Send the URL. Setup steps that are not in Help Center are out of scope for this module—stop and use Contact rather than inventing a snippet.
Study path
- Read the three required pages end to end.
- Write your in-scope and out-of-scope product types on paper.
- Add knowledge language that repeats visualization, not fit proof.
- Verify one eligible and one ineligible SKU on a staging theme after setup.
- Place the privacy URL in the support macro.
Team quiz (ungraded)
If a salesperson says “the try-on proves it will fit,” what do you correct? If a shopper asks where their photo goes, which URL do you send? If a product is not eligible, what should the assistant do instead of forcing a preview? If an ad says “see your size,” is that compatible with this module?
Preferred direction: correct to visualization language; send Virtual Try-On and Image Privacy; offer catalog facts, published size notes, or in-catalog alternatives; and do not let ads outrun product truth. This quiz has no passing score and no certificate.
Category notes without invented fit
Apparel visualization is still not a tailor. Footwear visualization is still not a sizing device. Jewelry visualization is still not a materials certificate. Point teams at Footwear, Jewelry, and Fashion for assortment context, not for a fit algorithm.
Failure modes
- Support macros that say “it will fit if the try-on looks good.”
- Campaign creative that implies biometric body scanning.
- Setup on production before eligibility is listed.
- Knowledge that contradicts the legal privacy page.
Ads, support, and the same sentence
If marketing says “see your size” and the store says “visualization for eligible products,” shoppers will believe the ad. Align creative before setup. Support macros should send Virtual Try-On and Image Privacy rather than a paraphrase. Knowledge should not upgrade the feature during a cart stall.
Missing size variants are not a try-on problem. They are a catalog problem. Do not use visualization to paper over an incomplete size curve. Catalog grounding module first if you skipped it.
Practice on two SKUs
Choose one product merchandising will mark eligible and one it will not. After documented setup, confirm the first can offer visualization and the second cannot. Confirm staff language on both. Confirm a shopper question about photos routes to the legal URL.
Exit criteria
Any teammate can deliver the one-minute explanation without a fit guarantee, can find the setup runbook, and can send the privacy URL. Related: Merchant Knowledge, Getting Started, and the webinar-style session brief on try-on in Webinars—still written on-demand, not a live clock.
Write the one-minute script
“Virtual Try-On is a visualization for eligible products. It is not an exact-fit assessment. If you ask about your photo, here is the privacy page.” Practice that aloud. Then practice the ineligible branch: “This product is not eligible for try-on. Here is what the catalog does say, and here is an in-catalog alternative if one exists.”
Put both scripts in knowledge so the assistant does not improvise a stronger claim during a busy drop. Setup remains Virtual Try-On Setup. Product page: Virtual Try-On.
Misuse to watch in week one
- Sales quoting try-on as proof of size.
- Ads using body-scan language the legal page does not support.
- Using try-on because size variants are incomplete.
- Skipping the ineligible SKU test because the eligible demo looked fine.
This module still issues no score. You are done when support, merchandising, and ecommerce say the same sentence. Related session brief: Webinars.
Support macro contents
The macro should contain the visualization sentence and the privacy URL. It should not contain a fit promise, a biometric story, or a return-rate claim. If a shopper asks a size question, point to published size notes or variants—not to the preview. Setup: Virtual Try-On Setup. Legal: Virtual Try-On and Image Privacy.
Merchandising’s eligibility list should be dated when types change. A drop that adds a new product type is an eligibility event, not only a photography event.
Eligibility is a merchandising list with a date, not a mood. When a new product type lands in a drop, revisit the list before anyone follows setup clicks again. Visualization still is not exact-fit, and the privacy URL still is the only public image-handling story. Virtual Try-On.
If a product is not eligible, offer catalog facts or an in-catalog alternative instead of forcing a preview.
