Voice review

Review this plan by voice

The voice agent explains any task, answers questions grounded in this plan, and records a brain dump. Voice feedback is read-only and cannot approve or execute work. Allow the microphone when your browser asks.

The explicit Sonnet rollback keeps the existing capsule-only protocol. A lost connection retries the same Sonnet engine twice and reloads the complete persisted conversation. It never changes models during a conversation.

Sonnet 5 · no fallback
Using: browser default until voice starts
offline

Live transcript

not started

Voice answers are review evidence. Approval, sending, spending, and production changes stay in the originating chat. Voice trouble in this page? Open the standalone voice page.

0 of 12 decided

Review — Kertújítók measurable marketing plan

Plan: /Users/agency/Documents/Agty/KERTÚJÍTÓK/action-plans/2026-08-09-kertujitok-rescope-review.md

How to review this

T-001 — Verify the Cloudflare migration

Undecided
Task

Identify the real Cloudflare build and establish what can safely be promised before migration.

Authority gate

External systems read-only; local evidence write. No deployment, DNS, email, GHL, billing, CRM, or production change.

Problem solved

Hosting, ownership, SEO, forms, tracking, email, backup, and rollback parity are not yet proven.

Cost of inaction

A migration offer could hide a continuity risk or interrupt an important client service.

Benefit

A factual migration case, explicit blockers, and a reversible route for the offer and Loom.

Done

The exact build and staging target are identified; parity, ownership, SEO, forms, tracking, email, backup, rollback, and review integration are evidenced. 80/20: identify the build and the few blockers that change the client promise.

flowchart LR
  A[Unverified migration] --> B[Continuity audit] --> C[Safe client promise]
flowchart TD
  S1[Identify build] --> S2[Check parity and ownership]
  S2 --> S3[Check tracking email and rollback]
  S3 --> D{Evidence complete}
  D -- yes --> DONE[Migration recommendation]
  D -- no --> S2
Open questions
Decision

T-002 — Improve the lead-manager app

Undecided
Task

Make each lead easier to understand and manage, especially on a phone.

Authority gate

Local and staging write with synthetic data. GHL read-only. No real-contact mutation, client message, or production deploy.

Problem solved

The promised app needs a clearer overview and faster lead-management flow.

Cost of inaction

A client promise stays open and follow-up remains harder than necessary.

Benefit

The client can quickly see the enquiry, note, stage, reminder, and next action.

Done

A staging flow passes synthetic end-to-end and responsive checks at desktop, tablet, and mobile sizes. 80/20: make the mobile lead card understandable and actionable without extra views.

flowchart LR
  A[Scattered lead details] --> B[Clear mobile lead card] --> C[Faster follow up]
flowchart TD
  S1[Reproduce client flow] --> S2[Build smallest clarity fixes]
  S2 --> S3[Test actions and layouts]
  S3 --> D{Staging passes}
  D -- yes --> DONE[Production gate ready]
  D -- no --> S2
Decision

T-003 — Repair the reporting dashboard

Undecided
Task

Reproduce the client-visible problem and repair only confirmed dashboard defects in staging.

Authority gate

Local and staging write; external data sources read-only. No production, campaign, analytics, billing, CRM, or messaging change.

Problem solved

The dashboard is described as broken, but the failure may be availability, stale data, or misleading metrics.

Cost of inaction

The client cannot rely on the reporting surface or the reduced monthly service.

Benefit

A stable view with honest source, freshness, and limitation states.

Done

A defect ledger, staging repair, tests, source states, and responsive checks pass. 80/20: reproduce the actual failure and restore one trustworthy client view.

flowchart LR
  A[If the issue is access] --> B[Trace route and authorization] --> C[Restore safe access]
flowchart LR
  A[If the issue is stale data] --> B[Trace source and freshness] --> C[Show current truthful data]
flowchart LR
  A[If the issue is wrong metrics] --> B[Reconcile definitions] --> C[Correct client view]
Open questions
Decision

T-004 — Draft the replacement service offer

Undecided
Task

Finalize the commercial scope and draft one persuasive Hungarian migration and monthly-service offer.

Authority gate

Planning and local or email-draft write only. No send, contract, invoice, GHL cancellation, billing, campaign, DNS, CRM, or production action.

Problem solved

The direction exists, but scope, terms, verified claims, and GHL consequences remain incomplete.

Cost of inaction

The current engagement may end without a clear replacement.

Benefit

One factual client-ready offer with explicit inclusions, exclusions, and next steps.

Done

Approved terms, verified migration claims, accurate GHL wording, bonus scope, and an unsent Hungarian draft exist. 80/20: lock the scope and produce one short factual email.

flowchart LR
  A[Unclear next period] --> B[Verified scoped offer] --> C[Client decision]
flowchart TD
  S1[Ground migration claims] --> S2[Resolve commercial terms]
  S2 --> S3[Draft and verify offer]
  S3 --> D{Matt approves terms}
  D -- yes --> DONE[Unsent final draft]
  D -- no --> S2
Open questions
Decision

T-005 — Prepare the migration Loom

Undecided
Task

Prepare a concise walkthrough of the verified setup, benefits, controls, and rollback.

Authority gate

Local script and draft recording only. No upload, publication, send, production change, credential exposure, or unsupported claim.

Problem solved

The client needs a concrete, non-technical explanation before considering migration.

Cost of inaction

The offer stays abstract and harder to trust.

Benefit

A reviewable explanation aligned with the verified offer.

Done

A playable local draft and exact Hungarian script cover the verified architecture, ownership, tracking, SEO, bonus, backup, rollback, and unknowns. 80/20: an approved script and short staging walkthrough.

flowchart LR
  A[Abstract migration] --> B[Verified visual walkthrough] --> C[Lower perceived risk]
flowchart TD
  S1[Turn evidence into script] --> S2[Record verified staging]
  S2 --> S3[Check playback and claims]
  S3 --> D{Review safe}
  D -- yes --> DONE[Loom draft ready]
  D -- no --> S1
Decision

T-006 — Send the approved proposal

Undecided
Task

After explicit final approval, send the exact approved offer once and preserve the receipt.

Authority gate

Send only Matt's exact approved version to the approved recipient through the approved channel. No independent copy edit, contract, invoice, GHL cancellation, billing, CRM, DNS, campaign, or production action.

Problem solved

The must-do outcome remains incomplete while the offer is internal.

Cost of inaction

The client receives no replacement offer before the commercial change.

Benefit

One reviewed proposal reaches the correct recipient with auditable proof.

Done

The immutable approved copy, recipient, channel, and attachments are sent once and read back with a timestamp and message identifier. 80/20: exact approval before sending.

flowchart LR
  A[Approved internal offer] --> B[Single controlled send] --> C[Verified receipt]
flowchart TD
  S1[Freeze copy and recipient] --> D{Exact approval}
  D -- yes --> S2[Send once]
  D -- no --> S1
  S2 --> DONE[Read back receipt]
Open questions
Decision

T-007 — Explore the Excel quotation upsell

Undecided
Task

Request the current workbook and examples, then scope one grounded automation concept after permission and files arrive.

Authority gate

Unsent email draft and local redacted analysis. No unauthorized file access, publication, CRM write, send, quote, contract, invoice, production, or paid commitment.

Problem solved

The upsell is generic until the current quotation workflow is understood.

Cost of inaction

A proposed tool could remove useful functions or offer unclear value.

Benefit

One concrete, low-risk automation idea grounded in the real workflow.

Done

An unsent privacy-safe request exists and, after inputs arrive, one evidence-based optional scope is reviewable. 80/20: prepare the request and let missing files gate the concept.

flowchart LR
  A[Generic software idea] --> B[Real workbook evidence] --> C[Grounded optional scope]
flowchart TD
  S1[Draft file request] --> D{Inputs received}
  D -- yes --> S2[Map workflow and exceptions]
  D -- no --> WAIT[Wait without guessing]
  S2 --> DONE[Optional concept ready]
Open questions
Decision

T-008 — Park earlier work as future ideas

Undecided
Task

Classify the earlier plan and prepare one source-linked future-ideas registry.

Authority gate

Local inventory and Notion draft only. No Notion or CRM write, child Activity row, message, commercial-state change, or unrelated edit.

Problem solved

Old work should stop driving the current scope without losing evidence or opportunities.

Cost of inaction

Future agents may repeat work or mistake proposals for commitments.

Benefit

A small active scope with prior context still easy to recover.

Done

Every earlier item is classified and linked; one concise CRM-ready draft and placement proposal await review. 80/20: complete the local registry without external writes.

flowchart LR
  A[Mixed old scope] --> B[Classified evidence registry] --> C[Clean active plan]
flowchart TD
  S1[Inventory prior tasks] --> S2[Classify and link evidence]
  S2 --> S3[Draft registry and placement]
  S3 --> D{Complete coverage}
  D -- yes --> DONE[Ready for review]
  D -- no --> S1
Open questions
Decision

T-009 — Repair conversion and landing-page measurement

Undecided
Task

Close the duplicate-conversion, paid-session attribution, and changing-landing-page gaps from the 30-day report.

Authority gate

Read-only account diagnosis plus local and non-production staging write only. No live Google Ads, GTM, GA4, production, budget, bid, campaign-status, DNS, billing, GHL-contact, CRM, or migration change. Every live mutation requires a separate exact approval after the evidence and rollback are shown.

Problem solved

Ads events, form activity, phone clicks, connected calls, leads, and sales do not yet reconcile.

Cost of inaction

Campaign and landing-page decisions can optimize toward duplicated or soft events.

Benefit

One auditable funnel from paid visit to contactable lead, with stable landing-page reporting.

Done

Goal cleanup is re-verified; form events are deduplicated; clicks and calls stay separate; paid interactions reconcile to three stable landing pages; tests, rollback, and next-report queries exist. 80/20: make one paid landing page report an unambiguous interaction rate.

flowchart LR
  A[Mixed platform events] --> B[Deduplicated paid funnel] --> C[Trustworthy campaign decisions]
flowchart TD
  S1[Reconcile current sources] --> S2[Define unique business event]
  S2 --> S3[Restore paid attribution and stable pages]
  S3 --> D{Tests and rollback pass}
  D -- yes --> DONE[Next report measurable]
  D -- no --> S1
Open questions
Decision

T-010 — Correct wasteful search spend

Undecided
Task

Refresh and correct no-result search spend without optimizing against broken conversions.

Authority gate

Google Ads read-only diagnosis and local proposal by default. Budget, bid, keyword, negative-keyword, targeting, or campaign-status changes require Matt's exact approval after the refreshed evidence is shown. No billing change.

Problem solved

Some search activity consumed meaningful spend with weak reported outcomes while measurement and delivery remain unreliable.

Cost of inaction

Money can keep flowing to weak queries or inactive delivery without a trustworthy result signal.

Benefit

An approval-ready allocation based on search-term quality and verified business events.

Done

Delivery, billing gate, queries, negatives, spend, and reconciled outcomes are refreshed; approved changes have before-state, rollback, read-back, and monitoring evidence. 80/20: identify the few sources of most avoidable spend.

flowchart LR
  A[Unreconciled search spend] --> B[Fresh query and outcome audit] --> C[Approved efficient allocation]
flowchart TD
  S1[Refresh delivery and outcomes] --> S2[Rank waste and intent]
  S2 --> D{Matt approves exact changes}
  D -- yes --> S3[Apply and read back]
  D -- no --> HOLD[Keep account unchanged]
  S3 --> DONE[Monitoring receipt]
Open questions
Decision

T-011 — Improve the irrigation SEO opportunity

Undecided
Task

Turn the strongest existing organic topic into a verified, migration-safe SEO improvement.

Authority gate

Read-only Search Console and site audit; local or staging content and technical changes. No production publish, DNS, GHL, client message, or unsupported ranking claim.

Problem solved

One service page carries most of the site's current organic opportunity but still sits outside the strongest result positions.

Cost of inaction

The clearest low-effort SEO opportunity may be lost during migration.

Benefit

A focused improvement with a preserved URL and measurable post-migration benchmark.

Done

Current baseline, intent gap, technical and internal-link checks, staging change, migration rules, rollback, and a 60-day measurement plan exist. 80/20: fix the strongest evidence-backed on-page or linking gap in staging.

flowchart LR
  A[Visible topic outside top results] --> B[Focused migration safe improvement] --> C[Higher qualified visibility]
flowchart TD
  S1[Refresh query baseline] --> S2[Find smallest supported gap]
  S2 --> S3[Build and test in staging]
  S3 --> D{URL and signals preserved}
  D -- yes --> DONE[Measurement plan ready]
  D -- no --> S2
Decision

T-012 — Decide GFN versus third-party call tracking

Undecided
Task

Compare the blocked Google forwarding-number route with suitable third-party call tracking and recommend one reversible pilot.

Authority gate

Research, read-only account inspection, local evaluation, and no-cost sandbox testing only. No purchase, number port, production swap, call recording, consent change, Ads import, DNS, GTM publish, or vendor commitment without separate approval.

Problem solved

Phone-link clicks still cannot prove a connected call, source, duration, or business outcome.

Cost of inaction

Phone demand remains invisible and campaign value stays uncertain.

Benefit

A defensible call-tracking route with attribution, integrations, privacy controls, reliability, and known cost.

Done

Current GFN proof and blocker are refreshed; an official-source vendor matrix covers local numbers, dynamic insertion, call details, integrations, consent, portability, reliability, cost, and rollback; one pilot or no-go is recommended. 80/20: prove whether any vendor meets the essential requirements better than GFN.

flowchart LR
  A[Unproven call attribution] --> B[GFN and vendor comparison] --> C[Reversible evidence based pilot]
flowchart TD
  S1[Refresh GFN proof state] --> S2[Compare official vendor evidence]
  S2 --> S3[Design privacy cost and rollback gates]
  S3 --> D{Option beats current path}
  D -- yes --> DONE[Approval ready pilot]
  D -- no --> HOLD[Keep GFN or no go]
Open questions
Decision