Everything That's Wrong
Summary
17-section sample audit for formagents.com
4 issues found
Top 3 Issues
What We Checked
Pages, devices, and approach
Pages Audited
| URL | Type | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| https://formagents.com/ | homepage | Primary conversion page |
| https://formagents.com/pricing | pricing | Purchase decision support |
Devices Tested
How We Did This
We looked at your site the way a technical co-founder would—except you get the findings in plain English, not a Jira ticket.
Each page was checked across eleven dimensions: performance, reliability, security, email configuration, DNS, accessibility, SEO, AI search readiness, UX, branding, and technical implementation. Automated tools flagged the issues. We validated them, threw out the noise, and ranked what's left by what actually matters to your business.
A broken contact form on your homepage ranks higher than a minor performance tweak on a legal page. We prioritize by impact, not by what scanning tools think is "critical."
Every finding tells you where the problem is, why it matters, and how to verify it's fixed. You can hand this report to your developer, your agency, or whoever manages your site—and hold them accountable.
Discovery & Site Overview
Tech stack, hosting, and site context
How visitors reach your site
formagents.com
HTTPS is enforced and the canonical host is stable.
Content delivery and firewall status
Standard hosting edge detected.
Built With
Technologies powering your site
Domain Ownership
Registration and security status
| Registrar | Unknown |
| Expiry | Not included in sample snapshot |
| Security | Not included in sample snapshot |
Key Findings
Sitemap coverage should be confirmed
The sample crawl relied on linked pages rather than a parsed sitemap.
Evidence: sitemapParsed is false in this sample snapshot.
Recommendation: Publish and validate a sitemap that includes primary conversion pages.
Per-Page Audit
Detailed analysis of each page
Above the Fold
Hero, value proposition, and primary lead form.
CTA Visibility
Primary CTA is visible above the fold.
Performance Highlights
Mobile LCP should be reduced by trimming initial client work.
SEO Basics
Page Findings
Initial client work competes with the hero render.
Evidence: Mobile Lighthouse score is lower than desktop in this sample.
Recommendation: Defer non-critical client code until user intent.
See your pages analyzed
Get the same detailed breakdown for your critical pages.
Performance Audit
Core Web Vitals and speed analysis
Core Web Vitals
Loading Speed
How long until visitors see your main content
Slower first paint can reduce lead-form starts.
Visual Stability
Whether the page jumps around while loading
Layout movement is unlikely to block conversion.
Responsiveness
How fast the site reacts when visitors click
Interactions are generally responsive after load.
Score Breakdown
| Criterion | Score | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Mobile LCP | 3 | |
| Interaction readiness | 3 | |
| Asset weight | 3 | |
| Render blocking work | 3 |
Mobile visitors wait too long
The page can feel slower than the offer deserves.
Key Findings
Mobile LCP needs attention
The first meaningful content is slower on mobile than desktop.
Evidence: Sample mobile score is materially lower than desktop.
Recommendation: Delay non-essential JavaScript and third-party work until after intent.
Reliability & Runtime
Errors, failures, and stability
Error Overview
Score Breakdown
| Criterion | Score | Note |
|---|---|---|
| JavaScript errors | 3 | |
| Network health | 3 | |
| Third-party resilience | 3 | |
| Failure handling | 3 |
No critical runtime failures
The sample pages loaded without obvious reliability failures.
Key Findings
Security Audit
TLS, headers, and baseline security
TLS / HTTPS
Security Headers
Partial| HSTS | |
| X-Content-Type-Options | |
| X-Frame-Options | |
| Referrer-Policy | |
| Permissions-Policy | |
| Content-Security-Policy | Permissive |
Score Breakdown
| Criterion | Score | Note |
|---|---|---|
| HTTPS | 3 | |
| TLS | 3 | |
| Security headers | 3 | |
| Mixed content | 3 |
Security posture is acceptable
No emergency issue is shown in this sample, but headers should be reviewed.
Key Findings
Email Deliverability
SPF, DKIM, DMARC, and reputation
Email Authentication
SPF
Validv=spf1 include:_spf.google.com ~all
DNS lookups: 1/10
DKIM
PartialSample snapshot does not include selector discovery.
DMARC
MonitoringPolicy: none
Score Breakdown
| Criterion | Score | Note |
|---|---|---|
| SPF | 3 | |
| DKIM | 3 | |
| DMARC | 3 | |
| Sending-domain hygiene | 3 |
Email trust needs confirmation
Authentication records should be kept complete before outbound campaigns scale.
Key Findings
Domain & DNS Audit
Records, DNSSEC, and governance
Nameservers
DNSSEC
DNSSEC not shown in sample snapshot.
Domain Governance
DNS Records
Score Breakdown
| Criterion | Score | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Nameserver redundancy | 3 | |
| Core records | 3 | |
| DNSSEC | 3 | |
| Governance | 3 |
DNS is serviceable
Core DNS records are present in this sample, with governance still worth checking.
Key Findings
Accessibility Audit
WCAG compliance and usability
Violation Counts
Manual Testing Results
| Keyboard Navigation | Issues |
| Focus Management | Issues |
| Screen Reader Tested |
Score Breakdown
| Criterion | Score | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Automated violations | 3 | |
| Keyboard flow | 3 | |
| Focus management | 3 | |
| Screen reader basics | 3 |
Accessibility needs cleanup
The sample page is usable, but a few details could exclude some visitors.
Key Findings
Some controls need clearer labels
Accessible names should make every action unambiguous.
Evidence: Sample audit found at least one serious accessibility concern.
Recommendation: Review buttons, forms, and icons for complete accessible labels.
SEO Audit
Indexability, metadata, and structure
On-Page Coverage
Score Breakdown
| Criterion | Score | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Titles | 3 | |
| Descriptions | 3 | |
| Canonicals | 3 | |
| Structured data | 3 |
SEO basics are close
Core metadata exists, but structured signals should be strengthened.
Key Findings
GEO / AI Search Readiness
Content clarity for AI-generated answers
AI Search Readiness
| Value Proposition | Partial |
| Organization Schema | Yes |
| Direct Answers | No |
| Author Attribution | No |
| FAQ Content | Missing |
| Trust Signals | Yes |
Score Breakdown
| Criterion | Score | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Value proposition | 3 | |
| Direct answers | 3 | |
| Trust signals | 3 | |
| Schema support | 3 |
AI-search readiness is partial
The site has enough context to understand, but should answer buyer questions directly.
Key Findings
UX & Funnel Analysis
User journeys, buttons, and friction
Conversion Funnel
| Step | Desktop | Mobile | Key Issue |
|---|---|---|---|
| Understand offer | Good | Needs work | Mobile pacing feels slower than desktop. |
| Submit lead form | Good | Good | — |
Trust proof is not always adjacent to calls to action.
Score Breakdown
| Criterion | Score | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Primary path | 3 | |
| Mobile clarity | 3 | |
| Form friction | 3 | |
| Trust support | 3 |
The path is clear but cautious
The page explains the offer, but can make the next step feel safer.
Key Findings
Trust proof should sit closer to conversion points
Visitors should not have to hunt for confidence builders.
Evidence: Sample review found proof points separated from some CTAs.
Recommendation: Place relevant proof near lead forms and purchase prompts.
Branding & Consistency
Visual and copy coherence
Brand Consistency
| Logo | Consistent |
| Colors | Partial |
| Typography | Consistent |
| Voice | Partial |
| Components | Partial |
Score Breakdown
| Criterion | Score | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Visual consistency | 3 | |
| Voice | 3 | |
| Component consistency | 3 | |
| Trust impact | 3 |
Branding is mostly coherent
The site has a recognizable direction, with some polish still available.
Key Findings
Get actionable UX insights
Understand what's blocking conversions on your site.
Technical Implementation
Asset strategy and engineering quality
Key Metrics
Summary
Score Breakdown
| Criterion | Score | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Request weight | 3 | |
| JavaScript | 3 | |
| Caching | 3 | |
| Third-party load | 3 |
Technical weight can drop
The biggest win is avoiding work visitors do not need yet.
Key Findings
Initial JavaScript can be reduced
Some work can wait until the user asks for it.
Evidence: The sample review identified user-intent boundaries around auth and payments.
Recommendation: Keep marketing routes free of auth, analytics, and payment SDK initialization.
Prioritized Fix Plan
Ranked backlog of what to fix — 10 items
Marketing routes
Frontend
Load auth, analytics, and payment code only after user intent.
Visitors can see useful content sooner.
Run a production build and confirm fewer initial route chunks.
Homepage
Frontend
Reduce render-blocking work around the first viewport.
The hero is the first credibility moment.
Measure mobile LCP before and after the change.
Get your prioritized fix list
Know exactly what to fix first, with evidence and verification steps for each item.
Get Everything That's Wrong — $99One-time purchase. Delivered in 24 hours. 30-day money-back guarantee.
Scoring Breakdown
How we calculated the scores
Methodology
Weighted score across performance, reliability, accessibility, SEO, security, email, DNS, UX, branding, technical, and GEO.
Section Scores
| Dimension | Score | Weight | Confidence | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | 60 | 10% | medium | 6.0 |
| Reliability | 60 | 10% | medium | 6.0 |
| Accessibility | 60 | 10% | medium | 6.0 |
| SEO | 60 | 10% | medium | 6.0 |
| Security | 60 | 10% | medium | 6.0 |
| 60 | 9% | medium | 5.4 | |
| DNS | 60 | 9% | medium | 5.4 |
| UX & Funnel | 60 | 9% | medium | 5.4 |
| Branding | 60 | 8% | medium | 4.8 |
| Technical | 60 | 8% | medium | 4.8 |
| AI Search | 60 | 7% | medium | 4.2 |
Ready to see what's wrong with your site?
Same comprehensive methodology. Your website. Delivered in 24 hours.
Get Everything That's Wrong — $99One-time purchase. Delivered in 24 hours. 30-day money-back guarantee.