Website audit

Send four visitors through your website. See what they think.

Three real buyer types and one AI agent walk your site, page by page, and narrate the friction as they hit it — then score it and tell you what to fix first.

  • Takes about two minutes
  • No signup to see your score
  • Tests AI-agent readability
0.0/10

Report findings

Website audit

limehub.com.au

Trusted on sight, hard to shortlist

August 26, 2026
Lead generation
Full
Visit the site
6.2
/ 10
Solid with gaps
4
AI readability

Trust is the strongest category; proof is the weakest. That combination is rare. This site has assembled the credentials of an agency that closes enterprise work — IBM, SAP, Juniper Networks, Government approved supplier, Webflow Enterprise and HubSpot partner status, an all-onshore team — and then documents its work in a way that gives a buyer nothing to measure.

The gap between “I believe these people are real” and “I can justify choosing them” is where this site loses deals.

What this site is

What they do
Australian creative marketing and digital agency: brand strategy, Webflow development, HubSpot and demand generation.
Who it is for
Their own words: “mid-sized to large Australian B2B businesses, NFPs, and funded scaleups - typically companies with a dedicated marketing function.”
Sectors
SaaS, Enterprise technology, Professional services, MSPs, Financial services, Tech scaleups, NFP, Government
What they sell
Brand identity, Webflow build, CMS migration, UX design, Demand generation, HubSpot, CRO
Conversion event
Booking an intro meeting — via the contact form, 1300 375 336, or info@limehub.com.au
Proof on hand
28 case studies, 8 named testimonials, 22 client logos, Webflow Enterprise Partner, HubSpot Partner, Australian Government approved supplier
Buyer facts found
Timeline, Engagement process, Contact routes
Buyer facts missing
Pricing, Measured results
Machine readability
Server-rendered — full text available without executing JavaScript. robots.txt permits crawling; llms.txt appears to deny it.

An agency with enterprise-grade credentials selling to marketing leads who need a business case. Two of the five facts that buyer needs are missing from the site entirely — so the simulated visitors were briefed to go looking for them.

The four visitors

Cold visitor

Priya Raman

Marketing Manager, B2B SaaS scaleup

Awareness

Mixed

Arrived

Clicked a LinkedIn post. No prior brand awareness.

Wants

Decide in ten seconds whether this agency is for a company her size.

Judges on

Does the hero name an industry and an offer? Do the logos back it up?

  • Lands on the homepage Ten seconds. Convince me. (/)
  • Reads the hero headline Every agency says they're more than an agency. What do you actually do? (/)
  • Reads the subhead Start-up, scale-up and enterprise? So you'll take anyone. That's the opposite of reassuring. (/)
  • Hits the client logo wall SAP. IBM. Juniper. Football Australia. Okay — they're real. (/)
  • Finds the specialities list SaaS, tech scaleups, enterprise. This is the sentence I needed at the top, not buried in a list of fourteen. (/)
  • Reads a testimonial Head of BusinessOne at SAP. That's a real person with a real title. Good. (/)
  • Scrolls back to the top I'd probably enquire. But the logos convinced me, not the writing. (/)

Ready to act

Daniel Okafor

Head of Marketing, mid-market SAP partner

Consideration

Mixed

Arrived

Google search for “webflow migration agency australia”. Third result.

Wants

Migrate off a legacy CMS this quarter; needs timeline and rough cost before booking a call.

Judges on

Timeline in writing, an indicative budget, and evidence they have done migrations before.

  • Skips the hero, opens the FAQs I know what I need. Where's the detail? (/faqs)
  • Finds FAQ 21 A real number, in writing, without a call. First site this week that's told me anything. (/faqs)
  • Searches all 31 FAQs for cost You told me how long it takes but not what it costs. I can't take a timeline to my CFO. (/faqs)
  • Reads the SEO migration answer 301s, metadata, Core Web Vitals. Written by someone who has actually done this. (/faqs)
  • Looks for a booking link Book a Meeting in the nav, but the contact page is a form. Which one is faster? (/)
  • Reaches the contact page Phone and email in plain text, seven-step process laid out. Honest. I'll call. (/contact-us)
  • Weighs it up Going in blind on budget, and so are they. That's a wasted half hour for both of us. (/contact-us)

Comparison shopper

Meredith Shaw

Marketing Director, enterprise services

Evaluation

Stalled

Arrived

Peer referral. Comparison document already open with two rival agencies in it.

Wants

Build a case her CMO signs off when someone asks “why them?”

Judges on

Quantified outcomes, results inside testimonials, anything slide-ready.

  • Opens the work listing Don't just take your word for it — fine. Show me the numbers. (/projects)
  • Scans six project cards Good logos. Where are the results? (/projects)
  • Opens the Our Guard case study Ten pages, eight CMS collections, a four-stage buyer journey. This is good writing. (/works/our-guard-mutual-insurance-website-redesign)
  • Reaches the outcome section The quality of the conversation that follows a website visit. That is not a result. (/works/our-guard-mutual-insurance-website-redesign)
  • Checks the other 27 studies Not one percentage. Anywhere. My CMO's first question is going to be: did it work? (/projects)
  • Falls back to the testimonials Everyone's a pleasure to work with. Nobody says what changed. (/)
  • Closes the tab I think LimeHub might be the better shop. I just can't prove it to anyone else. (/)

AI agent

Research agent

AI assistant acting for a marketing director

Task execution

Partly blocked

Arrived

Direct fetch. Dispatched with a task and no brand context.

Wants

Return typical timeline, indicative cost and a contact route for three Australian Webflow agencies.

Judges on

Readable without JavaScript, facts extractable, a non-form contact channel, and the crawl policy.

  • GET / — parsing No JS shell, no empty container. I can actually read this one. (/)
  • Extracting fact 1 of 3 — timeline 8–10 weeks Webflow, 10–16 for complex migrations. Retrieved. High confidence. (/faqs)
  • Searching the services page for pricing No rates, no packages, no model. Continuing. (/what-we-do)
  • GET /llms.txt — crawl policy robots.txt was permissive and pointed here. Checking what it actually says. (/llms.txt)
  • Parsing directives ClaudeBot: Disallow. GPTBot: Disallow. Wildcard: Disallow. The notes claim indexing is allowed. (/llms.txt)
  • Cross-referencing the same domain An AI Search Readiness Checklist — sold from behind a file that tells me to go away. (/marketing-assets/ai-search-readiness-checklist)
  • GET a case study URL — 404 Nav sends humans to /projects, case studies live at /works/. Dead link in the sitemap too. (/projects)
  • Compiling for its user Fact 2 of 3 unavailable. Reporting timeline and contact route only. (/)

Journey feed

Cold visitor

Priya Raman

/

lands on the homepage

Ten seconds. Convince me.

AI agent

Research agent

/

GET / — parsing

No JS shell, no empty container. I can actually read this one.

Ready to act

Daniel Okafor

/faqs

skips the hero, opens the FAQs

I know what I need. Where's the detail?

Comparison shopper

Meredith Shaw

/projects

opens the work listing

Don't just take your word for it — fine. Show me the numbers.

Cold visitor

Priya Raman

/

reads the hero headline

Every agency says they're more than an agency. What do you actually do?

AI agent

Research agent

/faqs

extracting fact 1 of 3 — timeline

8–10 weeks Webflow, 10–16 for complex migrations. Retrieved. High confidence.

Ready to act

Daniel Okafor

/faqs

finds FAQ 21

A real number, in writing, without a call. First site this week that's told me anything.

Comparison shopper

Meredith Shaw

/projects

scans six project cards

Good logos. Where are the results?

Cold visitor

Priya Raman

/

reads the subhead

Start-up, scale-up and enterprise? So you'll take anyone. That's the opposite of reassuring.

AI agent

Research agent

/what-we-do

searching the services page for pricing

No rates, no packages, no model. Continuing.

Ready to act

Daniel Okafor

/faqs

searches all 31 FAQs for cost

You told me how long it takes but not what it costs. I can't take a timeline to my CFO.

Comparison shopper

Meredith Shaw

/works/our-guard-mutual-insurance-website-redesign

opens the Our Guard case study

Ten pages, eight CMS collections, a four-stage buyer journey. This is good writing.

Cold visitor

Priya Raman

/

hits the client logo wall

SAP. IBM. Juniper. Football Australia. Okay — they're real.

AI agent

Research agent

/llms.txt

GET /llms.txt — crawl policy

robots.txt was permissive and pointed here. Checking what it actually says.

Comparison shopper

Meredith Shaw

/works/our-guard-mutual-insurance-website-redesign

reaches the outcome section

The quality of the conversation that follows a website visit. That is not a result.

AI agent

Research agent

/llms.txt

parsing directives

ClaudeBot: Disallow. GPTBot: Disallow. Wildcard: Disallow. The notes claim indexing is allowed.

Ready to act

Daniel Okafor

/faqs

reads the SEO migration answer

301s, metadata, Core Web Vitals. Written by someone who has actually done this.

Cold visitor

Priya Raman

/

finds the specialities list

SaaS, tech scaleups, enterprise. This is the sentence I needed at the top, not buried in a list of fourteen.

AI agent

Research agent

/marketing-assets/ai-search-readiness-checklist

cross-referencing the same domain

An AI Search Readiness Checklist — sold from behind a file that tells me to go away.

Comparison shopper

Meredith Shaw

/projects

checks the other 27 studies

Not one percentage. Anywhere. My CMO's first question is going to be: did it work?

Ready to act

Daniel Okafor

/

looks for a booking link

Book a Meeting in the nav, but the contact page is a form. Which one is faster?

AI agent

Research agent

/projects

GET a case study URL — 404

Nav sends humans to /projects, case studies live at /works/. Dead link in the sitemap too.

Cold visitor

Priya Raman

/

reads a testimonial

Head of BusinessOne at SAP. That's a real person with a real title. Good.

Comparison shopper

Meredith Shaw

/

falls back to the testimonials

Everyone's a pleasure to work with. Nobody says what changed.

Ready to act

Daniel Okafor

/contact-us

reaches the contact page

Phone and email in plain text, seven-step process laid out. Honest. I'll call.

AI agent

Research agent

/

compiling for its user

Fact 2 of 3 unavailable. Reporting timeline and contact route only.

Cold visitor

Priya Raman

/

scrolls back to the top

I'd probably enquire. But the logos convinced me, not the writing.

Comparison shopper

Meredith Shaw

/

closes the tab

I think LimeHub might be the better shop. I just can't prove it to anyone else.

Ready to act

Daniel Okafor

/contact-us

weighs it up

Going in blind on budget, and so are they. That's a wasted half hour for both of us.

How each score was reached

Nav Detail binds here.

Navigation & findability — 6.0 / 10

Primary navigation is clear and conventional, and the 31-question FAQ hub is unusually well organised for an agency site. Two things pull the score down. “Our Work” in the nav resolves to /projects, but all 28 case studies live under /works/ — so a URL built from the listing page fails. A case-study URL declared in sitemap.xml also returned 404 on this run. Resources are split across /marketing-assets/ and root-level paths with no obvious rule.

  • / — nav labels: What We Do, About Us, Our Work, Resources, Contact Us
  • /projects — listing page, while detail pages live at /works/
  • /sitemap.xml — 217 URLs, one case study returning 404

Message clarity (ICP fit) — 6.5 / 10

The hero could be said by any agency in Australia, and the subhead widens the audience rather than narrowing it. The precise ICP does exist on the site — thirty questions deep in the FAQ — which means the clarity problem is placement, not thinking.

  • “More than just a Marketing Agency — we move Brands Beyond the Ordinary” — homepage hero
  • “Whether you're starting up, scaling fast, or managing enterprise complexity” — homepage subhead
  • “mid-sized to large Australian B2B businesses, NFPs, and funded scaleups” — FAQ 3

Trust & credibility — 8.5 / 10

Exceptionally strong, and the reason the cold visitor stayed on the page. Named enterprise logos, government supplier status, two certified platform partnerships, and eight testimonials attributed to named people with real titles at real companies. An all-onshore team is stated explicitly, and phone and email sit in plain text in the footer. Very little is missing here.

  • Client logos including SAP, IBM, Juniper Networks, Football Australia
  • “Australian Government Approved Supplier” and “Webflow Enterprise Partner” badges
  • “They are creative strategists and a pleasure to work with.” — Ananda Kumar, Head of BusinessOne, SAP

Proof depth — 4.5 / 10

The weakest category and the one that costs deals. Across 28 case-study pages there is no conversion lift, traffic figure, pipeline number or time saving. The Our Guard study is genuinely well written and states outright that success is measured qualitatively. The testimonials are warm and specific about the working relationship, and silent on outcomes.

  • “the measure of success is about the quality of the conversation that follows a website visit” — Our Guard case study
  • “Don't just take our word for it – check out some of the projects we've worked on.” — /projects
  • 28 case studies examined or listed; no quantified outcome found on any

Conversion path — 6.0 / 10

Genuinely good in places. The phone number and email are real tel: and mailto: links, and the seven-stage process from Intro Meeting through to “Delivery and Beyond” removes a lot of anxiety before a first call. Against that: no pricing or budget signal anywhere on the site, “Book a Meeting” in the nav resolves to a contact form rather than a calendar, and the form's own fields were not visible to text extraction.

  • “1300 375 336” and “info@limehub.com.au” — footer, as tel: and mailto: links
  • Seven-stage process: Intro Meeting, Project Brief, Proposal, Contract, Kick Off, Project Management, Delivery and Beyond
  • No pricing found on /what-we-do, any of 31 FAQs, or any case study

Scored 4.0 out of 10. The working, so it can be checked:

  • Readable without JavaScript — 3 of 3. Webflow server-rendered; every page returned full text on a plain fetch.
  • Buyer facts extractable — 1 of 3. Timeline and process yes; pricing and measured results absent.
  • Structured data — 1 of 2. Some JSON-LD present, but no FAQPage markup across 31 FAQs.
  • Non-form contact channel — 1 of 1. tel: and mailto: links usable without submitting a form.
  • Raw subtotal — 7.0 of 10.
  • Crawl policy deduction — minus 3.0. /llms.txt reads as a blanket block on AI crawlers, including a wildcard Disallow. If honoured, the site is invisible to answer engines regardless of how readable it is.

Final: 4.0 of 10.

Report findings

Ranked by likely impact. Each finding quotes the page it came from.

Critical

Machine readability

Resolve the contradiction between llms.txt and the AI-readiness offer

The AI agent found /llms.txt reading as a blanket block on AI crawlers — naming GPTBot, ClaudeBot, Google-Extended and PerplexityBot, plus a wildcard Disallow — while the same domain sells an AI Search Readiness Checklist. The file's own notes contradict its own directives.

Forget clicks on Google ads. The new fight is for a place in AI's answers. If your website isn't optimised for AI search and conversions, you risk being invisible.

View the page

What to do

  • Open the raw /llms.txt and confirm exactly what it says — do not act on a summary
  • Decide the policy deliberately: block training crawlers, allow answer-engine retrieval
  • Remove the blanket User-agent: * / Disallow: / block
  • Keep the named training-crawler denials, add explicit allowances for retrieval agents
  • Re-check robots.txt so the two files agree, and update the pointer comment
  • Re-test by asking an AI assistant to summarise the site after deploy

Critical

Proof depth

Put a measured outcome in every case study

Across 28 project pages the comparison shopper found no conversion lift, traffic figure, pipeline number or time saving — and closed the tab saying she could not prove the choice to anyone else.

the measure of success is about the quality of the conversation that follows a website visit

View the page

What to do

  • Pick the six strongest studies rather than retrofitting all 28
  • Ask each client for one number: lead volume, conversion rate, traffic, pipeline or time saved
  • Where a client won't share, use a metric you own — pages migrated, load-time delta, publishing speed
  • Add a results field to the Webflow CMS collection so every study carries one
  • Lead each study with the number, above the narrative
  • Ask the three warmest referees to add a result to their existing testimonial

Serious

Message clarity

Make the hero say who this is for

The cold visitor bounced off the headline and was only rescued by the logo wall four sections later. The precise version already exists on the site, thirty questions deep in the FAQ.

More than just a Marketing Agency — we move Brands Beyond the Ordinary

View the page

What to do

  • Lift the FAQ line: mid-sized to large Australian B2B businesses, NFPs and funded scaleups
  • Rewrite the H1 to name the buyer and the outcome, not the agency's self-image
  • Move the sector list above the fold and cut it from fourteen to the six you actually sell into
  • Keep “Beyond the Ordinary” as a brand line further down the page
  • A/B the new hero against the current one for four weeks before committing

Serious

Conversion path

Publish a budget signal, even a coarse one

Both the ready-to-act buyer and the AI agent retrieved a precise timeline and then hit nothing at all on cost. Price is absent from the services page, all 31 FAQs and every case study.

Most Webflow projects run 8–10 weeks from kick-off to launch

View the page

What to do

  • Agree an internal engagement floor with the leadership team
  • Add “engagements typically start from $X” to the services page
  • Add a pricing FAQ covering project versus retainer
  • Add an optional budget-range field to the contact form
  • Track enquiry quality for one quarter before publishing more detail

Worth fixing

Navigation

Collapse /projects and /works into one namespace

The nav sends humans to /projects, but all 28 case studies live under /works/. The AI agent guessed the wrong path and 404'd, and so will anyone building a URL from the listing page — including crawlers indexing your work.

Don't just take our word for it – check out some of the projects we've worked on.

View the page

What to do

  • Pick one canonical path and stick to it
  • 301 the other path at the Webflow level
  • Update nav, footer and every internal link
  • Regenerate the sitemap and resubmit in Search Console
  • Watch for 404s in Webflow Analyze for a fortnight after

Worth checking

Navigation

A sitemap-declared URL returned 404 on this run

The 100,000-page Webflow Enterprise migration case study is listed in sitemap.xml but returned 404 when fetched. It may be transient or a stale entry — verify before acting. If that study exists it is the strongest proof asset on the site.

/works/migrating-100-000-web-pages-in-webflow-enterprise

View the page

What to do

  • Fetch the URL directly and confirm the status
  • If the page was unpublished, remove it from the sitemap; if live, fix the slug
  • If the study exists, feature it prominently rather than leaving it in the tail
  • Add a scheduled link check so a dead sitemap entry surfaces automatically

Worth checking

Conversion path

Contact form fields were not visible to text extraction

The contact page's headline, copy, phone and email extracted cleanly, but the form's fields, labels and submit text did not. That may be a limit of this run's method — or it may be how an AI agent acting for a buyer experiences the page.

Ready to Move Beyond Ordinary?

View the page

What to do

  • Load the contact page with JavaScript disabled and note what renders
  • Confirm labels, required markers and submit text are present in the DOM
  • Keep a plain mailto and tel fallback beside the form
  • Run one screen-reader pass over the submission flow

Keep doing

Proof depth

Publishing real timelines in the FAQ

These are the most useful things on the site. The ready-to-act buyer visibly relaxed on reading them, and the AI agent retrieved them cleanly as task facts. Almost no agency in Australia commits to this publicly.

Most brand identity projects run 8–12 weeks from kick-off to final delivery

View the page

What to do

  • Keep the numbers current — a stale timeline is worse than none
  • Surface them on the service pages, not only in the FAQ
  • Add schema.org FAQPage markup so they are quotable in AI answers
  • Extend the same specificity to cost and this becomes a genuinely differentiated site

Keep doing

Conversion path

Plain-text phone, email and a documented process

The phone number and email sit in the footer as real tel: and mailto: links, so the AI agent could hand its user a usable next step without submitting a form — a fallback most B2B sites no longer offer.

1300 375 336 · info@limehub.com.au

View the page

What to do

  • Keep both as real links, not images or scripted reveals
  • Keep the seven-step “what to expect next” section
  • Write these into any redesign brief as non-negotiable
  • Repeat them above the contact form, not only in the footer

Send me a copy of this report

All findings with their tasks, the four visitor journeys and the methodology. We will email it within one business day.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Methodology and limitations

Four simulated visitors — three human buyer types and one AI agent acting for a user — were run against this site's real conversion event: booking an intro meeting via the contact form, phone or email.

What this run did. Live content pulled from 7 pages and reasoned over: structure, copy, navigation, calls to action, trust signals, proof and page-to-page consistency. robots.txt, llms.txt and sitemap.xml were fetched directly to test how the site treats automated and AI traffic. That the page text returned fully formed without executing JavaScript is itself the evidence behind the AI agent's readability finding.

What this run could not do. No live browser was connected, so there are no screenshots and no visual or mobile rendering check. No load-time or Core Web Vitals data was measured — run PageSpeed Insights separately. The contact form's fields could not be inspected. The verbatim contents of llms.txt could not be retrieved in full, so that finding rests on two consistent summaries: read the raw file before acting on it. Only 7 of 217 sitemap URLs were examined, and one of two attempted case-study URLs returned 404, which may be transient.

These findings are LimeHub's opinion based on observation at a point in time, not a statement of fact about the business's performance.