grokbot_ty
511968edaf
Capture the phased owner-to-AI audit wedge (promise, verify, dual scores, self-serve loop, demand, graph-as-Northstar) so it is durable on a branch off planning-rev2.
137 lines
5.0 KiB
Markdown
137 lines
5.0 KiB
Markdown
# Self-serve “Am I discoverable by AI?” — execution plan
|
||
|
||
**Branch:** `planning-selfserve-audit` (from `planning-rev2`)
|
||
**Status:** Working draft — captured from strategy conversation 2026-10-01
|
||
**Scope:** Ideas, concepts, and strategic direction turned into actionable phases. Not an artifact inventory from the old tree.
|
||
|
||
Related durable context lives in [`BUSINESS_PLAN.md`](./BUSINESS_PLAN.md). This file is the methodical build plan for the self-serve audit wedge.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Strategic spine
|
||
|
||
- **Spine:** Agent-era local SMB discoverability.
|
||
- **Pipes:** MCP (or other transports) are implementation choices, not the product.
|
||
- **Northstar (not v1):** An industry-wide graph others can use. Do not block v1 on the graph.
|
||
- **v1 wedge:** A self-service check where a business owner asks: “Is my business discoverable by AI?”
|
||
- **Channel:** Flexible — standalone web portal and/or inside a business’s own chatbot. One audit engine; shells can differ.
|
||
- **Positioning:** As much business-owner-to-AI as possible. Human-in-the-loop exists but will not scale — design must minimize human dependency.
|
||
- **Demand:** Advertising (and similar) drives small businesses to the portal for self-initiated audits.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Owner flow (target experience)
|
||
|
||
1. **Initiate** — Owner (or their AI / trusted helper) starts the check on the outcome promise, not on plumbing.
|
||
2. **Stakeholder verify** — Prove they are a stakeholder in the business (e.g. six-digit code to a known email on file). Unverified users do not get the deep audit.
|
||
3. **Deep audit** — Goes beyond NAP consistency across major providers to categorical information and relevance.
|
||
4. **Dual outcome** — A holistic picture of:
|
||
- **Presence:** Are they on the map?
|
||
- **Recommendability:** If they are, would an AI engine likely recommend them when someone asks about something in their genre?
|
||
5. **Self-serve next steps** — Plain-language findings and ranked DIY fixes; optional re-check. Human expert path is an escape hatch, not the default.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Phases (sequence)
|
||
|
||
### Phase 0 — Lock the promise
|
||
|
||
- One-sentence value prop owners understand without jargon.
|
||
- First wedge genre (who we speak to first).
|
||
- Plain-language definition of “recommendable.”
|
||
- v1 shell decision: web, chatbot embed, or both sharing one engine.
|
||
|
||
**Success:** The promise can be said in one breath without naming a transport (MCP, etc.).
|
||
|
||
### Phase 1 — Trust gate
|
||
|
||
- Claim-a-business + stakeholder verification (email code first; other signals later).
|
||
- Minimal PII, clear consent, rate limits / abuse controls.
|
||
|
||
**Success:** Verified owners reach the audit; unverified cannot.
|
||
|
||
### Phase 2 — Audit engine (the product)
|
||
|
||
- **Presence score:** On the map across major providers + category consistency.
|
||
- **Recommendability score:** Likelihood an AI would surface them for genre-relevant queries.
|
||
- Start with a thin, explainable rubric — not a black box.
|
||
- Outputs: plain-language findings + ranked owner-actionable fixes.
|
||
|
||
**Success:** Same business twice ≈ same scores; owner understands why.
|
||
|
||
### Phase 3 — Self-serve loop
|
||
|
||
- Results page / chat readback, fix checklist, optional re-check.
|
||
- No mandatory human review.
|
||
- Optional “ask an expert” as escape hatch only.
|
||
|
||
**Success:** Majority complete without human touch.
|
||
|
||
### Phase 4 — Demand
|
||
|
||
- Lightweight campaigns that send SMBs to the portal for a self-initiated audit.
|
||
- Funnel metrics: start → verify → complete → recheck.
|
||
|
||
**Success:** Acquisition cost and completion rate are known; creative/genre can iterate.
|
||
|
||
### Phase 5 — Toward the graph (later)
|
||
|
||
- Only after audits produce structured, consented business truth worth composing.
|
||
- Graph remains Northstar; does not gate v1.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Build order (what ships first)
|
||
|
||
1. Promise + wedge genre
|
||
2. Verify gate
|
||
3. Presence score
|
||
4. Recommendability score
|
||
5. Self-serve results / fixes
|
||
6. Recheck
|
||
7. Then ads / demand programs
|
||
|
||
Do **not** wait on the industry graph or a single wire protocol.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Open decisions
|
||
|
||
- First v1 genre
|
||
- Web vs chatbot shell (or both)
|
||
- Which providers feed “on the map”
|
||
- How “would AI recommend” is measured without overclaiming
|
||
- Source of “email on file” for verify
|
||
- Free vs paid audit
|
||
- What never goes to a human
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## v1 success bar
|
||
|
||
- Owner can finish alone
|
||
- Two clear scores with explainable why
|
||
- Actionable DIY fixes
|
||
- Repeatable recheck
|
||
- Ads can point at it without a sales call
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Workstreams (parallel once Phase 0 is clear)
|
||
|
||
| Workstream | Owns |
|
||
|------------|------|
|
||
| Promise & wedge | Positioning, genre, “recommendable” language |
|
||
| Trust & verify | Claim flow, codes, consent, abuse |
|
||
| Presence engine | Provider coverage, NAP + category checks |
|
||
| Recommendability engine | Rubric, explainability, genre relevance |
|
||
| Experience shell | Web and/or chatbot UX on one engine |
|
||
| Growth | Campaigns, funnel metrics |
|
||
| Graph (later) | Composition of consented structured truth |
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Capture note
|
||
|
||
Drafted in conversation 2026-10-01; written here so the plan is durable and not call-only. Revise in place as Ty locks decisions.
|