Lodven is a marketing diagnosis agent for technical founders. You give it a URL and it tears the site down across nine dimensions: positioning and offer clarity, conversion and trust, SEO and crawlability, GEO (whether AI answer engines can cite you), analytics readiness, and more. Then it hands you the top three experiments to run, each with a GitHub issue, a schema patch, and a GA4 spec. "Here's what to ship next," not a checklist of vague advice. The point is to close the loop most tools skip: find what's actually broken, run one experiment, measure, repeat. So I pointed it at lodven.com. The sharpest finding: almost no external evidence. GA4 referrals are basically my own tweets, Stripe checkout bounce-backs, and Google sign-ins. Nobody outside is writing about the product, which also means AI answer engines have nothing to cite when someone asks about site-diagnosis tools. The experiment it prioritized was unglamorous but concrete, and I'm running it in public along with everything else. That's the whole idea: the diagnoses, the experiments that work, and the ones that don't. If you pointed a diagnosis tool at your own site, what would it catch that you've been ignoring?