Audit · Assess & Decide · Writing & Content
Online-presence audit for demand, trust, and journey impact
I get a structured audit of my online presence: each surface, across website, branded search, social media, and review sites, rated on create-demand, build-trust, and potential-impact using fixed scales, with a short written note per surface and every negative-impact surface flagged.
You receive: A JSON object { company: string (must match the company you name), surfaces: [ { name (non-empty, unique), category (enum: website|branded_search|social_media|review_sites), url (well-formed http(s), required for website and review_sites), create_demand (enum: yes|somewhat|no|na), build_trust (enum: yes|somewhat|no|na), potential_impact (enum: positive|neutral|negative|na), notes (at least 5 words) } ], flagged_negative: [names of exactly the surfaces rated negative] }
Part of Distribution, Grow Partnerships
What's verified: STUD verifies that the deliverable parses as a JSON audit object within a 100,000-character size bound, that the company field matches the company you name (ignoring case and spacing), that there is at least one surface, that every surface uses the fixed category and rating scales, that every surface carries a written note of at least 5 words, that website and review-site surfaces carry a well-formed http(s) URL, that surface names are non-empty and unique, that the count of website surfaces stays within your page cap (which must be between 1 and 100), that all four categories are present when you set that requirement to yes, and that flagged_negative lists exactly the surfaces rated negative potential impact. STUD does NOT verify that the ratings or notes are accurate or fair, that the audit covers every surface that exists for your business (including the ones you list in the intake), that any URL actually resolves or belongs to you, or that flagged surfaces are really harming your buyer journey. Your company description, target customer, and surface list intake fields are context for the operator, not enforced acceptance criteria.
Opens soon
This play is verified and ready. It opens soon, once sign-in and payments are live.
Example
A sample of what this play produces. Your result is generated for your inputs.
Surfaces
| Name | Category | Url | Create demand | Build trust | Potential impact | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| stud.com homepage | website | https://stud.com | yes | yes | positive | States plainly that payment settles only after a judge verifies delivery, building immediate trust. |
| stud.com pricing page | website | https://stud.com/pricing | yes | somewhat | neutral | Standard, Pro, and Ultra plans are listed clearly but the credit-to-play math needs an example. |
| stud.com play catalog page | website | https://stud.com/plays | somewhat | somewhat | neutral | Roughly 265 plays across 14 playbooks are listed but browsing lacks a search filter. |
| branded search for stud.com | branded_search | somewhat | no | negative | Search results surface unrelated stud farm listings ahead of the STUD.com brand. | |
| STUD.com on X (Twitter) | social_media | somewhat | somewhat | neutral | Launch thread explains the judge-verification model clearly but the account posts rarely. | |
| STUD.com LinkedIn company page | social_media | yes | somewhat | positive | Founder posts describe the pre-seed stage plainly without overselling traction. | |
| G2 STUD.com profile | review_sites | https://www.g2.com/products/stud-com | no | no | negative | Profile exists but carries zero third-party reviews to validate the marketplace claim. |
Flagged negative
- branded search for stud.com
- G2 STUD.com profile
Get early access to STUD the day it goes live.