# Implementation Plan: Public Website Sales Copy & Positioning Rewrite **Branch**: `404-public-content-messaging` **Date**: 2026-05-25 **Spec**: `/Users/ahmeddarrazi/Documents/projects/wt-website/specs/404-public-content-messaging/spec.md` ## Summary This plan turns Spec 404 into a website-copy refactoring plan, not an architecture plan. The goal is to guide a later implementation that rewrites public Tenantial website copy toward B2B SaaS, cybersecurity, and IT-operations outcomes for MSPs, Enterprise IT, Security, and Audit. This implementation renders the approved homepage sales copy in `apps/website` while keeping platform/backend/runtime scope untouched. ## Scope Decision - **404 path found**: `/Users/ahmeddarrazi/Documents/projects/wt-website/specs/404-public-content-messaging` - **Decision**: This is the Public Website Sales Copy & Positioning Spec because the branch, folder name, prior title, and existing content all target public website messaging, homepage hierarchy, provider/trust wording, metadata, and `apps/website`. - **Spec artifact scope**: `spec.md`, `plan.md`, and `tasks.md` - **Website implementation scope**: `apps/website` source files and website smoke-test expectations needed for the homepage copy rewrite - **Explicitly out of scope now**: `apps/platform`, root package/workspace contracts, build output, runtime config, generated assets, dependencies, backend code, provider integrations, and unsupported trust/certification claims ## Repo Verification Before any later implementation agent edits website source, verify current repo truth instead of relying on this plan as a file-map guarantee: 1. Run `git status --short --branch`. 2. Locate the 404 spec folder with `find specs -maxdepth 2 -iname '*404*' -type d -o -iname '*404*' -type f`. 3. Read `specs/404-public-content-messaging/spec.md`, `plan.md`, and `tasks.md`. 4. Inspect the website structure with `find apps/website -maxdepth 3 -type f | sort | sed -n '1,180p'`. 5. Read `apps/website/package.json` and use only scripts that actually exist. 6. Confirm `apps/platform` remains outside the change. ## Current Copy Inventory The later implementation must inventory current visible website copy before changing it: - homepage hero and above-the-fold copy - homepage section titles and CTA labels - platform/product page copy - trust, pricing, contact, and docs entry copy if they repeat the same positioning - metadata titles and descriptions - navigation/footer labels only if they repeat stale positioning - smoke-test forbidden-pattern lists, if they exist The inventory must identify old internal, defensive, academic, or architecture-heavy wording, including: - category-first positioning - "operating model" language as visible marketing copy - "source of truth" or "provider-extensible" as hero philosophy - internal governance-process wording - defensive boundary language that crowds out outcomes - vague trust language that sounds like certification without proof ## Copy Refactoring Workstreams ### 1. Hero And Above The Fold Define the homepage first screen around this core message: - Microsoft 365 Policies unter Kontrolle bringen. - Policy-Drift früh erkennen. - Konfigurationen versioniert sichern. - auditfähige Evidence für Reviews, Changes und Recovery bereitstellen. - Intune as the first strong policy focus, not the product boundary. Primary CTA: "Demo buchen" Secondary CTA: "Plattform ansehen" ### 2. Problem And Pain Section The first supporting section must make the buyer pain explicit: - Microsoft 365 policies drift. - Admin centers show current settings but do not provide enough review context by themselves. - Operators need to know what changed, what is backed up, which evidence exists, and which findings need action before the next review. Avoid product-philosophy explanations here. ### 3. Capability Cards Capability cards must be outcome-led and use the spec copy as the default source: - Policy-Drift erkennen - Backups & Versionen behalten - Auditfähige Reviews vorbereiten - Recovery kontrolliert vorbereiten - Provider-Berechtigungen transparent machen - Entscheidungen nachvollziehbar machen Each card must describe what the buyer can see, compare, prepare, or document. Do not turn these into internal modules or architecture components. ### 4. Stakeholder And Persona Section Define a clear stakeholder section for: - MSP Operatoren - Enterprise IT - Security & Audit The section must show one reliable evidence basis for operators, security owners, and auditors. It should replace screenshot, Excel, and gut-feel decision language with review-ready evidence and traceable findings. ### 5. Differentiation Section Differentiate Tenantial without attacking Microsoft tools: - Tenantial does not replace Microsoft Admin Center. - Tenantial adds versioning, evidence, drift visibility, review context, and auditability. - Tenantial is built for governance and controlled review, not blind automation. ### 6. Trust Teaser Keep the trust teaser safe and specific: - allowed: audit trail, review packs, role-aware evidence, controlled recovery preparation, decision traceability - forbidden unless proven: DSGVO conformity, ISO certification, NIS2 conformity, German hosting, legal-proof evidence, complete evidence coverage, no-customer-data claims Do not make trust the hero story in Spec 404. A separate trust-focused spec can deepen it. ### 7. Bottom CTA End with an evaluation-oriented CTA: - Headline: "Bereit, Microsoft 365 Governance messbar zu machen?" - Body: "Sieh in einer fokussierten Demo, wie Tenantial Policy-Drift, Backups, Evidence und Reviews in einen kontrollierten Governance-Prozess bringt." - Buttons: "Demo buchen" and "Plattform ansehen" ### 8. SEO And Metadata Direction SEO metadata must compress the same B2B message: - Tenantial = Microsoft 365 policy governance - outcomes = drift detection, versioned backups, evidence, reviews, controlled recovery preparation, auditability - audiences = MSPs, Enterprise IT, Security, Audit - first domain = Intune - future posture = prepared for further policy domains, not live multi-cloud Do not use Intune-only, backup-only, autonomous remediation, or certification-heavy metadata. ## Claim Guardrails And Static Search Terms Later implementation must include static scans for stale or unsafe copy. At minimum, scan website source and emitted public output when applicable for: - `Die richtige Produktkategorie zuerst` - `Für Teams, die Governance gemeinsam tragen` - `Klare Grenzen statt überzogener Versprechen` - `Den nächsten Schritt bewusst wählen` - `provider-extensible managed environment operating model` - `source-of-truth first operating model` - `Observe-to-Audit` - `governance-of-record` - `unter absoluter Kontrolle` - `Drift in Echtzeit` - `automatisch reparieren` - `autonomous remediation` - `Self-healing` - `automatic restore` - `lückenlose Evidenz` - `gerichtsfeste Nachweise` - `immutable backups` - `DSGVO-konform` - `ISO-zertifiziert` - `NIS2-konform` - `Google supported` - `AWS supported` - `multi-cloud supported` - `href="#"` - `lorem ipsum` Safe copy can still use "Microsoft 365 first", "Intune als erster starker Policy-Fokus", and "für weitere Policy-Domänen vorbereitet" when the surrounding text clearly separates current capability from roadmap or architecture direction. ## Browser Smoke Requirements For Later Implementation Later implementation must verify: - desktop and mobile homepage first viewport reads cleanly - hero headline, subhead, supporting line, and CTAs are visible and not overlapping - section order matches the spec: hero, problem, capabilities, stakeholders, differentiation, trust teaser, bottom CTA - CTA targets are real routes or intentional in-page anchors - no placeholder links remain - no forbidden claims render in source or public output - metadata reinforces Microsoft 365 policy governance - Intune appears only as first domain or example focus - provider-extensible wording does not imply Google, AWS, or multi-cloud live support - `apps/platform` remains untouched Use the existing website scripts from `apps/website/package.json` and root workspace scripts only after verifying they exist. ## Runtime And Scope Boundaries This plan is intentionally static-website-only for the current task: - no platform source edits - no build output edits - no dependency changes - no package-script changes - no backend runtime changes - no provider implementation changes - no `apps/platform` changes ## Validation For This Spec Update For the current website-copy implementation, validation includes: - `corepack pnpm build:website` - targeted static claim scan for forbidden public copy in `apps/website/src` and `apps/website/public` - browser review on `http://127.0.0.1:4321/` - `git diff --check` - `git status --short -- apps/website apps/platform` - `git diff --name-only` Expected result: only approved 404 spec artifacts plus minimal `apps/website` source and website-smoke-test files are modified, with any pre-existing unrelated untracked files left untouched. ## Follow-Up Specs - **405 Trust**: proof-backed trust, hosting, privacy, security, compliance, legal, and evidence claims - **406 Provider Taxonomy**: public current-versus-planned policy-domain and provider vocabulary - **407 Use Cases**: dedicated MSP, Enterprise IT, Security/Audit, Recovery, and Review landing pages