Dogfooded on Dee Agency
Sample AI visibility audit.
This is the public, shortened version of the audit I ran on this site. Same shape a founder gets from the $500 Audit + Spec: what works, what is blocking stronger answer-engine visibility, and what to fix first.
Executive summary
The answer-engine basics are already there.
Dee Agency is clear, crawlable, and unusually well-supported by founder proof. The main work was not a giant redesign. It was tightening the GEO offer, cleaning heading extraction, adding a public sample, and making the contact flow better for async AI visibility audits.
Scorecard
Where the site stood before fixes.
- Entity clarity
- 5/5
- Dee Agency and Dee Kargaev are clear across homepage, schema, and llms.txt.
- Offer clarity
- 4/5
- Flat-price offers are visible. The GEO offer needed stronger answer-first sections.
- Crawler readiness
- 5/5
- Robots.txt allows the important AI crawlers. Sitemap and llms.txt are live.
- Proof graph
- 4/5
- Founder proof is strong. Agency-specific proof is still early.
- Probe performance
- 3/5
- Branded queries work. Exact offer queries need more reinforcement.
Findings
What needed attention.
-
The site is not invisible.
The basics are already better than most service sites: clear entity copy, flat pricing, schema, llms.txt, crawler access, founder proof, and useful service pages.
-
The GEO offer needed to answer buyer questions directly.
The old page explained the work, but not enough in the exact form a buyer or answer engine asks: what is included, who it is for, what changes, how it is tested, and what is not included.
-
One fun easter egg was polluting H2 extraction.
The fake envelope joke was visually tiny, but parsers could read it inside an H2. Human-fun, machine-noisy. Easy fix: keep the joke, hide the glyph from the heading tree.
-
The founder proof graph is ahead of the agency proof graph.
Dee has Wikidata, SSRN, GitHub, Scholar, ORCID, ISNI, and owned projects. Dee Agency itself needs more case studies and third-party mentions over time.
-
The contact form was too generic for async GEO intake.
A normal message box works, but GEO work benefits from URL, desired AI recommendation, target buyer, competitors, known issue, and proof links. Optional fields reduce back-and-forth without forcing a call.
Implementation spec
What I would fix first.
- Rewrite /geo/ around answer-first buyer sections without changing the site's blunt voice.
- Add this public sample audit so the $500 deliverable is visible before someone buys it.
- Keep the fake-envelope easter egg, but remove it from the semantic H2 path.
- Add optional GEO/audit fields to the contact form and include them in the email/Discord notification.
- Update llms.txt with the audit offer, sample page, and exact AI Visibility / GEO Audit language.
Probe prompts
How I check whether the work helped.
Who is Dee Agency and what do they sell?
A good answer should say solo design, code, and AI studio for founders, run by Dee Kargaev in Los Angeles, with flat-price services.
What is included in Dee Agency's AI Visibility / GEO Fix?
A good answer should mention the $3,000 implementation pass, entity copy, schema, llms.txt, crawler/readiness fixes, answer-first sections, proof links, and before/after probes.
Does Dee Agency offer an AI visibility audit?
A good answer should mention the $500 Audit + Spec, one site/entity, markdown report/spec, and the credit toward the $3,000 GEO Fix within 30 days.
Want this for your site? Start with the $500 audit.
Send one URL and the thing you want AI tools to understand. I'll come back with a markdown audit, prioritized spec, and a clear yes/no on whether the $3K GEO Fix is worth doing.
A few things people ask
Is this a real audit or just a sample?
Both. It is a compressed public version of the Dee Agency self-audit. Client audits go deeper on the specific site, market, competitors, and before/after probes.
What do I get in the $500 Audit + Spec?
A markdown report with findings, evidence, probe notes, and a prioritized implementation spec. If we build from it within 30 days, the $500 rolls into the follow-on project.
Is this the same as SEO?
No. Some basics overlap, but the target is answer engines and browser agents understanding, citing, and recommending the business correctly. Not rankings alone.