feat: refactor Ruska AI website to Mifune

[ryaneggz]

Summary

Reposition the marketing site from "Ruska AI / Orchestra" (a developer-tool / agent-orchestration platform) into Mifune — an AI implementation company that sells managed AI workers to non-technical business owners. Promotes the existing /services green idiom to the homepage, encodes the value-ladder funnel (Audit → AI Partner → Done-For-You → Managed AI Workforce on OpenHarness), and wires the on-page audit form to Airtable.

Goals

1. Reposition homepage copy + structure to managed-AI-workers framing (Hero → Pain → Offer → What-you-get → Case study → Trust → FAQ → audit form → CTA).
2. Encode the pricing ladder on a new /pricing route + a 3-package homepage Offer, both from one typed config.
3. Wire the on-page audit intake form to Airtable via apiClient.contactFormSubmit.
4. Complete the Ruska → Mifune brand migration with zero stale-branding leaks (grep gate).
5. Adopt the /services green idiom across all sections; drop purple/blue/font-cormorant/text-gold-500.

PRD

• tasks/mifune-website-refactor/prd.md (this branch) — 16 user stories (US-000…US-014, US-010 split a/b).

Critique

• 2-critic adversarial gate ran BEFORE this issue. 4 HIGH findings raised; 3 resolved at AC level in PRD v2 (Airtable Message-drop → US-000; CTAButton/BOOKING_LINK stale-brand leak → CTA rule + US-001; 3-pkg vs 4-tier naming → ladder mapping). 4th HIGH (missing .claude/ICP.md) is a harness-side gate gap, not a deletion proposed here.
• Recommendation: PROCEED (confirmed by focused re-review).

Tracking

Scaffolded by /ship-spec (adapted for the independent mifunedev/website repo). Draft PR to follow.

[stevesagronegocios673-ux]

Quick homepage/refactor note after reading the issue plus the current src/app/page.tsx, src/sections/HeroSection.tsx, src/app/services/page.tsx, src/components/nav/TopNavBar.tsx, and src/config/app.ts: the hard part here is not just swapping copy. The current site has three different buyers mixed together.

On /, HeroSection is still selling a developer-tool product:

Steer Agents to Precision.
Orchestra gives you flexible agent orchestration with guided autonomy...
[Launch Orchestra] [Star on GitHub]

But /services is already closer to the new direction: Automation as a Service, integration partner, retainer, security, and SMB automation. Then the issue wants Mifune to sell managed AI workers to non-technical business owners. I would make the first screen choose that buyer completely, before pricing or Airtable wiring.

A tighter homepage hero could be:

Mifune
Managed AI workers for busy business owners.

We audit your repetitive workflows, build the first AI worker, and keep it running so your team gets automation without hiring an AI department.

[Get the AI audit] [See what we can automate]

Then the value ladder becomes much easier to understand if it is framed as customer risk reduction:

1. Audit — find the workflow worth automating first.
2. AI Partner — design the worker and implementation plan with you.
3. Done-For-You — build and deploy the first production workflow.
4. Managed AI Workforce — monitor, improve, and add workers over time.

A few concrete implementation/copy notes I would add to this issue:

• Do the stale-brand grep before polishing sections. TopNavBar.tsx still renders RUSKA and /images/ruska_logo_200.png; src/config/app.ts still points social links at ruska-ai; /services still has COMPANY_TAG = 'ruska-ai', reggleston@ruska.ai, and FAQ copy that says Ruska/Orchestra.
• Replace Launch Orchestra and Star on GitHub with business-owner CTAs. Those CTAs are correct for a developer tool, but wrong for managed AI workers.
• Keep the /services green idiom, but remove tool-stack proof from the first half of the page. Non-technical owners need proof of managed outcome first; Claude Code / OpenClaw / LangGraph / MCP can move lower as "how we build it".
• The homepage Offer section should not show three packages that fight the four-step ladder. Use three purchasable cards, but visually label the fourth as the ongoing destination: Managed AI Workforce.
• The audit form should ask for the workflow pain in the user's language, not implementation details: What repetitive work eats time every week?, Which tools are involved?, What happens if it fails?

My acceptance test would be: before scrolling, a non-technical owner should not see agent orchestration, GitHub, LangGraph, or Orchestra. They should see the business promise, the first low-risk action, and the fact that Mifune stays responsible after the worker ships.

Want the fuller pass? I can send a compact rewritten hero + 5 exact copy blocks for Pain, Offer ladder, What-you-get, Audit form, and stale-brand grep/CTA replacement.