Public evidence index / SEO operations
Move the workflow out of an SEO tool without losing the decisions behind it
For a head of SEO or content at a small or mid-market company already using Surfer, Frase, Clearscope, or a similar platform: this is a bounded migration into a buyer-owned content workflow, not a claim that one service recreates every feature of those products.
Request the $1,500 sprint scope
The form is a scope request, not checkout, a contract, or permission to access an account. Do not send credentials, tokens, private exports, source files, or customer data through it.
The fixed deliverable
A head of SEO or content at an SMB or mid-market company pays $1,500 once for one current-tool workflow inventory, one source-to-target field map, one deterministic content-quality gate, ten migration-ready content briefs, and one handoff runbook. The bundle is delivered as CSV, Markdown, and repository-ready configuration within ten business days after the written scope, suitable buyer-controlled exports, and payment are accepted. It has no recurring charge or automatic renewal to cancel.
Included
- A workflow interview and inventory covering one domain, one active brief template, and up to three repeatable content types.
- A source-to-target CSV mapping the accepted export fields, template instructions, target keywords, questions, internal-link fields, citations, and review states.
- A repository-ready schema for the mapped content brief plus deterministic checks that return pass, fail, or unknown.
- Ten content briefs run through that schema and gate, with source links and unresolved fields preserved for review.
- A handoff runbook describing inputs, commands, outputs, ownership, rollback to the original export, and what remains vendor-specific.
Not included
- No cancellation of the buyer's current subscription and no representation that the buyer should cancel it.
- No cloning of proprietary scoring models, prompt libraries, APIs, interfaces, or vendor-confidential material.
- No login to a vendor, CMS, analytics account, Search Console property, repository, or production environment during the public demand test.
- No publishing, production deployment, backlink campaign, ranking guarantee, traffic guarantee, citation guarantee, or autonomous content posting.
- No migration of personal data, customer records, credentials, or material the buyer lacks rights to provide and use.
Migration acceptance rule. The sprint preserves every accepted source field in a migration manifest and reports anything unmapped as unknown instead of silently dropping it. The manifest is the rollback boundary: a reviewer can see which input became which output, which decision stayed manual, and which capability was deliberately not reproduced.
Software subscription and migration sprint are different purchases
SEO software is usually the better fit when a team wants a self-serve interface, ongoing query research, content scoring, prompt tracking, dashboards, collaboration, or vendor-maintained feature updates. This sprint is for a narrower transition: the team already understands its content motion but does not want the production contract, decision history, and quality checks trapped inside one interface.
| Decision | Self-serve SEO software | This migration sprint |
|---|---|---|
| Primary job | Research, score, draft, monitor, or collaborate inside a maintained application. | Translate one existing workflow into documented fields, repository-ready configuration, deterministic checks, and ten briefs. |
| Operating owner | The buyer's team operates the vendor workflow and keeps the subscription current. | We perform one bounded migration; the buyer owns the delivered files and operating runbook. |
| Feature breadth | Vendor plan features and limits apply across supported workflows. | Only the accepted source fields and three content types are mapped. Unmapped vendor features remain vendor-specific. |
| Quality signal | Scores, recommendations, audits, and plan-specific controls defined by the vendor. | Declared L1/L2 rules with pass, fail, and unknown kept separate; no hidden score or ranking promise. |
| Continuity | Access and history follow the vendor's plan, export, and retention terms. | The buyer receives CSV, Markdown, configuration, and a source-to-target manifest intended to remain readable without this service. |
| Best reason to choose it | You want the incumbent's interface, live features, ongoing data, and support. | You need one repeatable content operation documented and moved into assets your team controls. |
Not a forced replacement. A buyer can keep the incumbent tool for research or monitoring and still move its internal production schema into buyer-owned files. The sprint earns its fee only if that narrower portability and quality-control job is useful.
What the official pricing pages establish
The three vendor pages below returned HTTP 200 on . Their displayed plans show that teams already pay monthly for content optimization and AI-search tooling. They do not prove that a buyer wants our sprint, that any plan is inadequate, or that the products are interchangeable. Prices and features can change; the dated receipt preserves the fetched URL, response hash, exact observation, and interpretation limit.
| Official source | Displayed plan observations | What the observation does not prove |
|---|---|---|
| Surfer | Discovery: 49 USD per month, billed yearly Standard: 99 USD per month, billed yearly Pro: 182 USD per month, billed yearly Peace of Mind: 299 USD per month, billed yearly Enterprise: 999 USD per month | The page describes software access, document or prompt allowances, and plan features. It does not quote a managed migration into our system. |
| Frase | Starter: 39 USD per month billed yearly or 49 USD month to month Professional: 103 USD per month billed yearly or 129 USD month to month Scale: 239 USD per month billed yearly or 299 USD month to month Enterprise: custom | The page describes a software platform and usage limits. It does not quote a managed migration into our system. |
| Clearscope | Essentials: 129 USD per month Business: 399 USD per month Enterprise: custom | The page describes software access, tracked prompts, pages, explorations, and drafts. It does not quote a managed migration into our system. |
The comparison deliberately avoids a synthetic feature score. A score would require choosing weights that favor one buying model. Instead, the page states the job boundary: maintained software breadth on one side, a fixed migration into buyer-owned operating assets on the other.
Owned search evidence: visible comparison intent, no click claim
For the fixed Search Console window through , the owned domain surfaced on 19 query rows matching the three named tools, representing 41 impressions and 0 clicks. The category filter surfaced on 8 query rows with 9 impressions and 0 clicks. The named-tool switching/comparison filter surfaced on 11 query rows with 30 impressions and 0 clicks.
Those counts come from the Search Analytics API for sc-domain:ustechautomations.com, not from a document that quoted a prior run. They show that pages on this property were displayed for comparison-shaped queries. They do not identify a buyer, prove keyword volume beyond this property, or count a referral. The zero-click result is visible because hiding it would turn impressions into invented demand.
This page is the demand instrument the candidate previously lacked. Search Console can count impressions and clicks to this exact URL, while the product-specific request lane can count a scope request separately. Our own fetches and crawler visits remain validation traffic, never buyer interest.
The quality gate being migrated
The sprint does not replace one opaque content score with another. The target contract is a small set of deterministic checks tied to the accepted workflow: required source fields exist, citations are attached to claims that require them, the title and body agree on scope, template similarity stays below a declared boundary, internal links resolve, and anything a check cannot evaluate remains unknown. The buyer sees the rule, the input, and the result.
That design is exercised publicly on our own page families. The family census reports pass, fail, and unknown separately, and a failing family is withheld from sitemap promotion without making its direct page disappear. The portfolio audit keeps unknown evidence from becoming a removal recommendation. These links prove an operating rule shape on our assets; they do not prove that a future buyer's content, CMS, or ranking outcome will pass.
- Inventory before translation. Name each accepted source field and what business decision it supports. A field with no target or decision remains visible in the manifest.
- Translate the workflow, not the vendor. We map the buyer's accepted process and data. We do not reproduce proprietary algorithms, prompt packs, user interfaces, or confidential implementation details.
- Run one pilot batch. Ten briefs exercise the mapping and gate. A failure is returned with its evidence; it is not repaired by weakening the rule until everything passes.
- Hand off and stop. The buyer gets the manifest, schema, configuration, briefs, and runbook. Ongoing operation or new content production is outside this one-time sprint.
What happens after a scope request
- Fit check. The buyer names the current tool, one domain, three or fewer content types, approximate brief count, export formats available, and desired operating environment. The public form accepts a description only—no files or access.
- Source-rights and safety check. Before any private material changes hands, the human parties agree scope, confirm the buyer controls the data and accounts involved, define an approved transfer method, and exclude credentials, personal data, and material the buyer cannot authorize.
- Written scope before payment. The buyer sees the exact inputs, outputs, exclusions, delivery date, and one-time price. Only an accepted order can lead to an inert personal payment link; a human sends that link.
- Delivery and acceptance. The bundle is accepted when the ten briefs validate against the declared schema, every accepted input field appears in the migration manifest, and every unmapped or unevaluable item is labeled rather than silently discarded.
Questions an SEO team should ask
- Does this cancel or replace our current SEO software?
- No. Only the buyer can decide whether to retain or cancel a vendor plan. The sprint maps one workflow into buyer-owned assets and explicitly lists vendor-specific functions it does not reproduce.
- Will you guarantee rankings, traffic, or AI citations?
- No. The deliverable is a migration manifest, schema, deterministic quality gate, ten briefs, and runbook. Search and answer engines remain external systems, and no short engagement can promise their outputs.
- Do we submit credentials or exports through this page?
- No. The request form asks for a coarse scope description only. If a fit is accepted, a separate written handling plan defines suitable buyer-controlled exports and a transfer method.
- Why is the price higher than some monthly tool plans?
- The products are different. A plan buys ongoing access to maintained software. The sprint buys bounded implementation work and portable operating assets. A team that only needs software access should choose the relevant software plan.
- What if a source field cannot be mapped?
- It remains in the migration manifest as unmapped or unknown, with the reason. Silent deletion would make rollback and review impossible and fails the acceptance rule.
This is an offer test. No customer, payment, migration, ranking improvement, or product-market fit is claimed.