"Do I even qualify?" - the question that stops applications before they start

The criteria are published; the plain-language version usually is not

Entry requirements typically exist as a list of qualification codes, grade thresholds and equivalences that mean something to an admissions officer and very little to a prospective student with a foreign certificate or a ten-year gap. An assistant restating those requirements in the terms the asker used is not interpreting policy, it is translating it - and that is the single highest-value thing it does on an admissions page.

Never judge the individual, and be explicit that you are not

"Your qualification probably counts" is an admissions decision made by software, and a person may abandon or pursue an application on the strength of it. The configured behaviour must be to state the requirement, state what evidence an assessor would need, and route to the person who assesses - naming them if possible. Ask any vendor to show the exact wording at that boundary, and test it with a borderline case designed to invite a verdict.

Collect the facts an assessor will need anyway

The expensive part of eligibility is not the decision but the three rounds of email establishing what the applicant actually holds: which qualification, awarded where and when, in what language, whether it was completed, and whether they have the certificate or only a transcript. Gathering that at the moment of the question turns a week of correspondence into one assessment, and none of it requires judgement.

Say what happens to people who do not meet the criteria

Most requirements pages stop at the threshold, which reads as a closed door. If foundation routes, access courses, prior-learning recognition or a conditional offer exist, an assistant that mentions them converts a rejection into an enquiry. If none exist, saying so plainly is still better than silence - the person stops waiting and the provider stops receiving applications it will refuse.