Point WeSimplifAI at any live page — yours, or a prospect's. It reads it the way a skeptical visitor would — what's working, what isn't, and what it honestly couldn't check — in minutes, not a week with an agency.
If it's your own site: you wrote it, so you can't see it the way a stranger does. If it's a prospect's: "I think your site could be better" reads as opinion, not evidence — easy to wave off. A free automated grader will tell you load time and meta tags are fine. A CRO agency will tell you the truth, for $1,000–$5,000 and a couple of weeks. Neither gives you something specific enough to act on, or open a conversation with.
An overall score and rating band, what's actually working, what's costing you conversions, and the specific fixes to make first — with every claim traceable to something really on the page. Not a technical score. A read.
Pick a company you'd genuinely like to work with. Run the audit. Reach out grounded in what you actually found — not a guess, not a template pitch.
"You pick a real prospect. WeSimplifAI audits what they have today — real findings about their current site, not a generic pitch."
"You reach out, grounded in evidence — an outreach email and a proposal that reference what you actually found."
See a real example — a prospect audited exactly this way →You start with what you already know — what kind of business this is, what you want a visitor to do, who that visitor is. WeSimplifAI reads your page against that: checking links and contact paths, matching claims against what's actually there, and flagging anything it can't fully see — instead of quietly assuming it's missing, or making it up. You watch it work through real stages, not a spinner that just says "thinking."
Nothing else required to start. Two more are optional and come last: where most visitors arrive from, and — only if you want to add it — what you already suspect isn't working, with a real example shown so you're not staring at a blank box.
Every claim on your page gets one of four honest states — never just "found" or "not found." Something it can't fully see never gets silently scored against you, and it never gets silently assumed present either.
The first is this capability's own real output. The second is the hand-audited editorial standard it's held to — both against the same page, so you can compare.
Both examples above are real and both are honestly labeled: the first is generated by cp001.pageaudit itself, the second by hand. What's still missing: persona-matched examples for SaaS and coaching pages — the one example above is a local/in-person-service business, so a SaaS or coaching visitor doesn't yet have proof that reads as "for someone like me."
A captured, watchable walkthrough of the full Recognition → Read → Score sequence, and a documented worked example of the four-state model catching an ambiguous case, are both still being produced for public view — the underlying mechanisms are proven in production today; what's pending is the recording.
Genuinely good at what they measure — load time, valid meta tags. WeSimplifAI doesn't try to out-measure them.
Tells you whether a real visitor believes what you're claiming. That's not a performance number. It's a judgment call, and it's the one WeSimplifAI makes.
A report is worth more in your inbox than in a browser tab. Two ways it's meant to be used, depending on whose site you just audited.
A quiet aside, not a pitch: once an audit turns into a real client conversation, WeSimplifAI also drafts proposals and runs project boards — worth knowing, not something this page is steering you toward in advance.
Point WeSimplifAI at any live page — yours, or a prospect's. WeSimplifAI takes it from there.