"Will this actually get me a job?" and the honest shape of the answer

The outcome claim is the easiest thing to invent and the hardest to keep

A figure for graduates in work within six months is persuasive, cheap to assert and almost never traceable to a method. If your institution has one, publish how it was measured, over which cohort, counting whom - and if it cannot survive that sentence, it should not appear on a page or in an assistant's answer. Prospective students forgive an institution that says it does not track something. They do not forgive discovering the number meant something else.

What can be said instead, and it is more persuasive

The concrete things: what the qualification entitles the holder to apply for, which employers have recruited from this course and when, what the assessment actually produces that a student can show someone, whether there is a placement and whether it is guaranteed or competitive. Specifics are checkable, which is exactly why they are believed. A named employer and a date persuade harder than any percentage.

Refuse the individual version, every time

"Will I get a job with this" is a question about one person's prospects and an institution cannot answer it, in a chat window least of all. The correct move is to say so plainly and then give the person what is actually decidable: what the course leads to, who to speak to about their particular situation, and what previous students with similar backgrounds have gone on to do. Refusing without redirecting reads as evasion.

The questions asked after enrolment are different, and nobody answers them

Transcripts, certificate replacement, reference requests, confirmation of attendance for an employer or an embassy, alumni access to the library. These arrive for years, they are entirely administrative, and they land on whoever happens to be nearest. Publishing them once is one of the highest-return pages an institution can write, and the traffic is invisible until you look at the inbox.