Work with PrimeCo
The writing here is free and stays free. The engagements are where the diagnosis, the judgement and the building happen.
PrimeCo is a software design and engineering studio, and the publisher of this site. Twenty years of building software, named inventor on over forty granted US patents, and project work spanning Google, Disney, Nike, Visa, LinkedIn and Adobe. More on who does the work.
Recent relevant work includes agentic AI design patterns at one of the world’s largest enterprise software platforms, which is covered by an agreement that means it cannot be named or described in detail. The public case study is on the studio site. There are no citation-lift percentages anywhere on this page, because none of them would survive the sourcing standard the rest of the site is held to.
The published method is where we start, not what you get
Everything on this site is free, and the checklist and rubric are deliberately public so you can run them yourself. If that is all you need, do it and keep your money.
What a checklist cannot give you is the diagnosis: why a particular business is invisible, which of its pages are commercially load-bearing rather than merely popular, what its buyers actually ask and where, what its stack will realistically support, and which recommendations are worth the disruption. That differs enough between a marketplace, a bank and a documentation site that a standard engagement would be worthless to at least two of them. Every engagement is scoped to the business in front of us.
AXO audit
You find out why your content is not being used by AI systems, in specific terms, and what it is costing you.
The answer is rarely the thing people expect. Sometimes it is a rendering decision made years ago that means half the site is invisible to fetchers. Sometimes the content is fine and the problem is that nothing resolves your company to a known entity, so credibility earned elsewhere never attaches to you. Sometimes you are being read and cited already, and the real problem is that nobody can tell because the measurement is wrong.
Finding out which of those it is takes judgement about your business, not a rubric. A marketplace, a bank and a documentation site fail for different reasons and the fixes are not interchangeable. We work out where your buyers actually ask their questions, what your competitors are being cited for that you are not, and which of your pages are load-bearing commercially rather than merely popular.
You get a prioritised plan with the reasoning attached, sized against what your team can realistically ship, and an argument you can take to whoever controls the budget.
A good fit when
Something is clearly not working and the internal diagnosis has stalled, or you need a defensible baseline before committing budget.
Probably not when
You scored well on the public checklist and nothing has changed since. Re-run it in a quarter.
Implementation
The work is done, by people who build production software, and it holds up after we leave.
Most of what gets recommended in this field dies in the backlog because it is written by people who will not have to build it. PrimeCo is a software studio first. The recommendations we make are ones we would be willing to implement ourselves, on your stack, against your constraints.
In practice that means whatever your architecture actually requires: server rendering for content currently trapped behind hydration, structured data wired into your CMS so it cannot drift from the page, entity and identity work that makes your organisation resolvable, crawler and licensing policy set deliberately, and where it earns its place, an MCP server or WebMCP tool surface so agents can act on your product rather than scrape it.
The durable part is the part nobody sells: making the correct behaviour automatic, so the next hire cannot quietly undo it.
A good fit when
You know roughly what needs to happen and want it built properly, or an audit told you and the internal team is at capacity.
Probably not when
The strategy is still unsettled. Start with the audit or advisory.
Advisory
You stop spending money on tactics that do not work, and get the architectural decisions right the first time.
This field produces an enormous amount of confident advice with very little behind it. A standing second opinion is usually worth more than another project, because the expensive mistakes here are decisions rather than tasks: how you structure content your agents will consume, whether to build an agent surface at all, what to allow crawlers to do, how much autonomy to give a system acting on a customer.
We work with the people making those calls, on your roadmap rather than a generic one. Reviewing decisions while they are still cheap to reverse, reading the evidence behind whatever is being pitched to you this quarter, and saying plainly when something does not hold up.
Most of the value shows up as things you did not build.
A good fit when
You have a capable team and need judgement rather than hands, or you are being sold something and want an independent read.
Probably not when
You need someone to own delivery. That is implementation.
Workshops and training
Your team stops making decisions from assumptions that expired eighteen months ago, and starts making them faster.
The usual failure is not ignorance, it is drift: writers optimising for something that stopped mattering, engineers implementing advice that was quietly retracted, and everyone arguing from different vintages of the same article.
Sessions are built around your product, your stack and the decisions actually in front of you, then pitched at who is in the room. Writers, engineers, SEO and product need different things from this subject, and a session that treats them identically wastes most of the room.
The part people remember is what the evidence does not support, which usually saves more time than the tactics do.
A good fit when
A team large enough that shared understanding is the bottleneck rather than individual skill.
Probably not when
One or two people. Read the site, it is free and it is the same material.
Agentic transformation
You know where agents genuinely belong in your business, where they do not, and in what order to find out.
Every company is being told to become agentic. Very few are being told which parts of their operation would actually be improved by it, which would be made materially worse, and what has to be true about their data, permissions and error tolerance before any of it is safe to try.
That analysis cannot be templated, because it turns on how your business really runs: where the judgement calls live, which processes are load-bearing enough that failure is unacceptable, what your people currently do that is tacit and undocumented, and where the regulatory floor sits. We map the work, identify the candidates honestly, and design the sequence so the first thing you ship is something that can fail safely.
The phrase "where it makes sense" is doing real work. Most of the value in this kind of engagement is in what gets ruled out, and a plan that recommends agents everywhere is not a plan, it is a brochure.
A good fit when
An established company with real processes, real constraints, and pressure to have a position on this.
Probably not when
You want a pilot to point at. That is a smaller and cheaper piece of work, and we will say so.
Getting started
Tell us what you are working on and what is going wrong. If it is not something the studio should take on, we will say so rather than scoping it anyway.
Everything on this site stays free and ungated regardless. The editorial policy and commercial disclosure explain how the two sit together.
Last reviewed .