The problem this solves
International expansion decisions get made in strategy meetings, and the site finds out later. The market is chosen, the launch quarter is set, and only then does someone ask whether the site can actually serve it: whether the URL structure can hold a second locale, whether hreflang exists at all, and whether translated pages would land in a search landscape anyone has examined. The technical answers arrive late, and late answers become launch delays or, worse, quiet compromises that hobble the market for years.
The homework is genuinely two-sided. The technical side is about your own site: locale architecture, hreflang correctness, and the template changes a second language forces. The market side is about theirs: what local competitors rank for, how the local search landscape phrases the problems you solve, and where the content gaps are that a well-prepared entrant could claim. Teams usually get a partial answer to one side from an agency deck and no answer to the other, then discover the connection between them mid-launch.
A readiness check worth the name does both sides before commitments harden: audits the site's actual international posture, maps the local landscape you would be entering, and writes the findings into a rollout plan that sequences the technical work and the content work against each other. Delivered as a document the launch team can argue with, it turns the site from a launch risk into a known quantity.
How the mission runs
- Audit the site's international posture. Site Audit examines the site as it stands: current hreflang implementation if any, URL architecture and what a locale layer would require of it, template readiness for translated content, and the technical debt a second language would inherit. Findings are concrete, tied to specific templates and paths.
- Map the target market's search landscape. Keyword Intelligence maps the German-market landscape for your category: how local searchers phrase the problems you solve, what volume sits where, and which local and international competitors hold the ground today. The map is built in the market's own language and terms.
- Find the content gaps worth entering through. The competitor map is read for openings: topics local players cover thinly, intents served badly, and areas where your existing content, properly localized, could compete credibly early. Gaps are ranked by attainability, since a new entrant's first battles should be winnable ones.
- Sequence the rollout plan. Technical work and content work are sequenced against each other: what must exist before the first localized page ships, which architecture decision has to come first, and what the first two content phases should target. Each recommendation states its reasoning and its dependency chain.
- Write the plan into Google Docs. The full readiness check lands as a Google Doc: the technical audit with findings, the market map, the ranked gaps, and the sequenced rollout plan. Written for the launch team - specific enough for engineers, legible enough for the people who own the market decision.
The prompt
This is the exact objective the agent receives. Swap the obvious placeholders for your own domain, segment or channel and run it as-is from the console, Slack, or the API.
What comes back
A Google Doc holding the complete readiness picture: the site's actual international posture with specific technical findings, a map of the target market's search landscape in its own language, content gaps ranked by attainability, and a rollout plan sequencing technical and content work with dependencies stated. Every claim traces to the audit or research call behind it, so the launch team plans against evidence rather than assumption.
Make it yours
- Run it for two or three candidate markets in parallel and let the comparative readiness picture inform which market actually goes first.
- Convert the plan's technical prerequisites into engineering tasks once the team approves the sequencing, so the document becomes a backlog the same week.
- Re-run the market map a quarter after launch, measuring which targeted gaps were actually claimed and re-ranking what remains for the next content phase.
Frequently asked questions
Does this cover the language and cultural side of localization?
It covers what is checkable from data: how the market actually phrases and searches its problems, which is where literal translation usually fails first. Full cultural adaptation of voice and content needs native review, and the plan says so explicitly, sequencing that review as a step rather than pretending research replaces it.
What if the site turns out to be far from ready?
Then that is the finding, delivered while it is still cheap to act on. The plan sequences the remediation with dependencies stated, so leadership sees what readiness actually costs in work and time before the launch date hardens. An honest early answer is precisely what the check is for.
Why deliver a document instead of tasks?
Because market entry is a decision before it is a backlog. The Doc is built for the argument the launch team needs to have: scope, sequencing, and whether the timeline is real. Once the plan survives that argument, converting its prerequisites into tracked tasks is a natural follow-up step.