“Gmail placement: 72%” is useful as a headline, but debugging deliverability needs the underlying data. When three of fifty Gmail seeds went to Spam, which three? What auth verdicts did they see? Which tenant configuration?
What we show per seed
- Seed mailbox ID and provider variant.
- Folder: Primary / Promotions / Updates / Social / Focused / Other / Junk / Spam / Missing.
- SPF / DKIM / DMARC verdicts as that seed saw them.
- Raw Received-From chain.
- Raw Authentication-Results header.
- Content flags (HTML issues, tracking pixel detection, link resolution).
- Time to delivery.
Why detail beats averages for debugging
- Alignment bugs often affect a subset of seeds (one region, one tenant, one filter layer). Without per-seed detail you average them away.
- Third-party filter layers in front of Workspace surface as specific-tenant failures.
- Partial spam placements (e.g., only on a specific Gmail regional cluster) reveal IP or subdomain reputation issues.
- Raw headers are often the fastest path to a root cause.
In the UI and API
Per-seed detail is available in the web UI report and in the full JSON response from GET /api/tests/:token. Export as CSV or JSON for analysis.
Run a test, look at the detail
Run a test. Click any seed to see its full record. Free, no signup.
FAQ
Do I see seed email addresses?
No — for abuse prevention, seed identifiers are anonymised. You see provider + region + tenant-class; you don't see the literal email address.
Can I export per-seed data?
Yes, CSV and JSON.
Does per-seed detail work for CIS providers?
Yes — same detail model across every provider we cover.
Related reading