You find out which engines can reach your pages, which ones cite you today, and what is stopping the rest. Then, if you want it fixed rather than documented, the same person who ran the audit does the build, at a fixed price you approve before anything starts.
I audit sites for LLM crawlability and citation-readiness, then fix what the audit finds. The AI Citability Audit is $497 and returns in 5 business days: 15 checks run by hand against ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google AI Overviews, plus a prioritized list of what is blocking your citations. Larger builds run $1,997 to $5,000+.
If ChatGPT and Perplexity never cite your site, those buyers go to whoever they do cite. In 5 business days you get the exact list of what is blocking you, 15 real tests, and a 30-minute call to walk through fixing it. Nothing scored that was not tested.
Book an Audit →4-week guided implementation. Structured data, content architecture, technical SEO, and AI-readiness improvements from your audit findings. Weekly progress calls included.
Start a Sprint →These are my own numbers, on my own site, with the measurement date and instrument named so you can re-run them. They are not client case studies, because I will not put a testimonial on this page before I have one worth quoting.
Search "claude code adhd" on Google. Two of the eight sources Google cites in its AI Overview are pages on this site. Measured 2026-08-11 via the live SERP API, not self-reported.
Across 2,523 distinct queries and 145 pages, on a site run by one person with no ad spend and no link buying. The system that produced that is the system I install for clients.
Original research: I pulled AI Overviews for eight commercial AI-services queries. 36 of 59 cited sources were not in the organic top 5 at all. That gap is the opening I build against.
| This engagement | AI agency | Generic freelancer | Hiring in-house | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Who does the work | The person you talked to | A junior, after the pitch | One person, variable | A hire you must find first |
| Time to first working artifact | 1 to 2 weeks | 4 to 8 weeks | 1 to 3 weeks | 3 to 6 months |
| Typical cost | $497 to $5,000 | $25,000+ | $50 to $150 per hour | $150,000+ per year |
| Pricing model | Fixed scope, fixed quote | Retainer plus change orders | Hourly, open-ended | Salary plus overhead |
| Evidence you get | Tests, audits, logs, runbook | A slide deck | Varies | Internal only |
| What happens at handoff | You own the code and the docs | Often locked to their stack | Usually yours | Yours, plus the headcount |
MVP BUILDS FROM $500 · RANGES REFLECT SCOPE, NOT NEGOTIATION ROOM · FIXED QUOTE AFTER A SCOPING CALL
A call, then a written scope with deliverables, timeline, and a fixed quote. No open-ended hourly drift.
Short cycles with working artifacts at each checkpoint, never a long silence ending in a reveal.
Every claim gets a receipt: tests, audits, benchmarks, or logs. The same [VERIFIABLE] standard the writing holds.
Documentation, runbooks, and a recorded walkthrough. You own everything; nothing is held hostage.
For a small business, the useful version is not strategy decks. It is finding the two or three manual processes eating the most hours, then building an AI system that runs them. I scope the problem, build the system, prove it works, and hand you the documentation. Typical engagements run 2 to 4 weeks at $497 to $5,000.
A single-purpose AI agent that handles one workflow typically runs $2,000 to $5,000 and takes 2 to 4 weeks. A scoped audit of what to build first is $497. Full custom systems with multiple integrations start at $5,000. Every quote is fixed after a scoping call, so the number you approve is the number you pay.
Generative engine optimization, or GEO, is making your site quotable by ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google’s AI Overviews, which increasingly answer buyer questions before anyone clicks. You need it if your buyers ask AI tools for recommendations in your category. In a study of eight commercial AI-services queries I ran on 2026-08-11, 61% of the sources cited in Google’s AI Overview were not in the organic top 5, which means citation and ranking are now separate games.
Yes, and that is usually the cheaper path than replacing anything. Most integrations run against an existing CRM, help desk, spreadsheet stack, or internal database through their APIs. The scoping call establishes what your tools expose before any quote, so nothing is promised against an API that does not exist.
Rarely. Most small teams already know which work is painful. A one-week audit that names the highest-value automation and proves it is technically feasible beats a strategy engagement, and costs an order of magnitude less. If after the audit there is no worthwhile build, I will tell you that instead of selling you one.
With an agency you are usually pitched by a principal and delivered by a junior, on a retainer with change orders. Here the person who scopes the work is the person who writes the code, at fixed price, with the full artifact history visible along the way. The tradeoff is honest: I am one person, so I do not take on work needing a large team, 24/7 on-call, or enterprise procurement.
Every claim ships with a receipt: tests, audits, benchmarks, or logs. Nothing is scored that was not tested. At handoff you get documentation, runbooks, and a recorded walkthrough, and you own all of it. If a result cannot be verified, it does not get claimed.
Two of the offers are Stripe checkouts with no scoping call needed, so they start the day you buy. Custom builds need one call first; email hello@chudi.dev with the problem, your current stack, and any deadline, and you will get a reply within 24 to 48 hours, either a call link or an honest "not a fit" with a referral.
Describe the problem, the current stack, and the deadline if there is one. You will get a reply within 24–48 hours, either a scoping call link or an honest "not a fit" with a referral.
hello@chudi.dev →Prefer not to open your mail client? Use the contact form.
NO DISCOVERY-CALL FUNNEL · NO RETAINER LOCK-IN · WRITTEN SCOPE BEFORE ANY INVOICE