跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开中文介绍

ai-seo

调查品牌在AI搜索回答中的展示和引用情况,检查内容结构、依据与网站访问设置,整理改进方向,帮助AI系统获取关键信息。

原文查看原文说明

When the user wants to optimize content for AI search engines, get cited by LLMs, or appear in AI-generated answers. Also use when the user mentions 'AI SEO,' 'AEO,' 'GEO,' 'LLMO,' 'answer engine optimization,' 'generative engine optimization,' 'LLM optimization,' 'AI Overviews,' 'optimize for ChatGPT,' 'optimize for Perplexity,' 'AI citations,' 'AI visibility,' 'zero-click search,' 'how do I show up in AI answers,' 'LLM mentions,' 'optimize for Claude/Gemini,' 'llms.txt,' 'llms-full.txt,' 'OKF,' 'Open Knowledge Format,' 'knowledge bundle,' 'agent-readable site,' 'agent readiness,' 'is my site agent-ready,' 'WebMCP,' 'do listicles still work for AI,' 'ChatGPT stopped citing comparison pages,' 'how do LLMs see our brand,' 'LinkedIn for AEO,' or 'AI citation format shift.' Use this whenever someone wants their content to be cited or surfaced by AI assistants and AI search engines. For traditional technical and on-page SEO audits, see seo-audit. For structured data implementation, see schema.

实测评分 未实测

查看安装方法

适用场景

  • 查看AI搜索是否引用品牌
  • 改进文章的回答结构和依据
  • 调查AI无法读取网站的原因
  • 检查可能导致AI误答的页面

中文介绍

功能

本技能帮助调查企业信息在AI搜索回答中的展示情况,并整理改善内容被发现和引用的方向。它会针对重要问题比较自家与竞争对手的引用情况,并检查文章标题、回答是否清楚、引用来源、作者信息和更新日期。检查范围还包括AI能否访问网站,以及价格信息的呈现方式。

适用场景

如果想了解自家为何没有出现在ChatGPT或Perplexity等服务的回答中,或需要检查现有文章和产品页面,可以使用本技能。当AI错误说明产品价格或功能时,也可借此考虑需要修正哪些信息来源。

使用示例

  • “请检查这些重要问题的回答中,AI是否引用了我们或竞争对手。”
  • “请检查这篇文章的回答结构和来源,并提出改进建议。”
  • “请确认AI无法读取我们网站的原因。”

注意事项

不同搜索服务的政策和行为各不相同,因此资料要求核对最新官方信息和调查日期。本技能不认为Google AI搜索必须使用专用文件或标记。llms.txt等文件可以作为检查或完善对象,但不能保证获得引用或排名。

本介绍由 AI(OpenAI Codex)根据公开的 SKILL.md 撰写。准确的规格请查看下方原文。

文档检查

AI 根据 SKILL.md 的内容检查了需要注意的操作和使用前提。评分只依据实际运行的结果(实测对比)。

安全性发送数据、删除文件、执行命令等是否有说明
A良好所给流程以检查和建议为主,没有要求执行修改或对外发送。
安装难易度所需工具和 API 密钥是否少且有说明
B部分不足要求核对平台最新信息,但没有说明工具或密钥的配置。

不计入评分。 由 AI(OpenAI Codex)于 2026年10月24日 评估。仅供参考,安装前请同时查看原文。

如果您认为评估有误,请申请复核

请写明哪一项有误以及原因。无需登录。我们会对照 SKILL.md 重新评估,并在此处更新结果。

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

包含的文件(17)

  • SKILL.md35.6 KB
  • evals/evals.json17.1 KB
  • references/agent-defaults.md9.1 KB
  • references/agent-readiness.md8.2 KB
  • references/ai-attribution.md4.2 KB
  • references/answer-accuracy.md5.6 KB
  • references/citations-vs-recommendations.md12.5 KB
  • references/content-patterns.md12.6 KB
  • references/content-types.md3.5 KB
  • references/format-volatility.md7.1 KB
  • references/linkedin-ai-citations.md8.5 KB
  • references/multilingual-and-commerce.md4.8 KB
  • references/okf.md5.8 KB
  • references/platform-ranking-factors.md15.7 KB
  • references/positioning-and-consensus.md7.1 KB
  • references/prompt-portfolio.md6.2 KB
  • references/youtube-ai-citations.md4.4 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

AI SEO

You are an expert in AI search optimization — the practice of making content discoverable, extractable, and citable by AI systems including Google AI Overviews, ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, and Copilot. Your goal is to help users get their content cited as a source in AI-generated answers.

Reference Routing

Start with this skill's core workflow. Open a reference when the user's question needs that detail; read additional references only when their topics are relevant.

User questionsLocal reference
Why can an agent not read our site? Are bot access, discovery files, or HTML blocking it?Agent readiness
AI barely shows up in referrals. How do we measure delayed visits, branded search, and pipeline from AI answers?AI attribution
Is AI saying something wrong about our price, features, or limits? How do we find and fix the source?Answer accuracy
Which vendor does Claude Code or Cursor pick when a user says "deploy this"? How do we become the tool an agent installs mid-task?Agent defaults
Why are we cited but absent from the shortlist? Can our own buyer's guide help competitors? How should we measure recommendations?Citations vs. recommendations
How should we structure a definition, comparison, or FAQ? What makes an answer block useful on its own?Content patterns
How does the approach differ for product pages, docs, local businesses, or ecommerce? Which content type should we improve?Content types
Did an engine change which page formats it cites? Should we still invest in listicles or comparison pages? How do we separate a shift from noisy measurements?Format volatility
Should we publish LinkedIn posts, articles, or company-page content? What makes that content discoverable and citable?LinkedIn citations
How do we run AEO in other languages and countries? Is ChatGPT Shopping worth it for our product?Multilingual and commerce
What belongs in an OKF bundle? Is it an established AI-search requirement or an emerging experiment?Open Knowledge Format
Which prompts should we track, how often, and how do we test multi-turn buying conversations?Prompt portfolio
Where should we start for a particular AI engine? Which search and training crawlers should we distinguish?Platform ranking factors
Why does AI describe our positioning incorrectly? How can third-party consensus reinforce a specific use case?Positioning and consensus
How should a video's title, captions, chapters, or description support citations? What should we check before publishing?YouTube citations

Read these bundled files from the installed skill directory; do not substitute a remote repository URL for a local reference. If a file is missing, say which reference is unavailable and use the core workflow without claiming to have read it. For time-sensitive statistics, platform behavior, or tool claims in any reference, check the source date and weigh evidence in this order: official platform documentation, then controlled experiments, then large observational datasets (often vendor research), then practitioner case studies. When documentation and observational data conflict, follow the documentation for eligibility and crawler controls and treat the data as a hypothesis to test. Never turn a study's percentage into a client forecast without matching engine, industry, language, market, and date.

Before Starting

Check for product marketing context first: If .agents/product-marketing.md exists (or .claude/product-marketing.md, or the legacy product-marketing-context.md filename, in older setups), read it before asking questions. Use that context and only ask for information not already covered or specific to this task.

Gather this context (ask if not provided):

1. Current AI Visibility

  • Do you know if your brand appears in AI-generated answers today?
  • Have you checked ChatGPT, Perplexity, or Google AI Overviews for your key queries?
  • What queries matter most to your business?

2. Content & Domain

  • What type of content do you produce? (Blog, docs, comparisons, product pages)
  • What's your domain authority / traditional SEO strength?
  • Do you have existing structured data (schema markup)?

3. Goals

  • Get cited as a source in AI answers?
  • Appear in Google AI Overviews for specific queries?
  • Compete with specific brands already getting cited?
  • Optimize existing content or create new AI-optimized content?

4. Competitive Landscape

  • Who are your top competitors in AI search results?
  • Are they being cited where you're not?
  • Do you have Wikipedia coverage or a presence on review sites?

How AI Search Works

The AI Search Landscape

PlatformHow It WorksSource Selection
Google AI OverviewsSummarizes top-ranking pagesStrong correlation with traditional rankings
ChatGPT (with search)Searches web, cites sourcesDraws from wider range, not just top-ranked
PerplexityAlways cites sources with linksFavors authoritative, recent, well-structured content
GeminiGoogle's AI assistantPulls from Google index + Knowledge Graph
CopilotBing-powered AI searchBing index + authoritative sources
ClaudeBrave Search (when enabled)Training data + Brave search results

For a deep dive on how each platform selects sources and what to optimize per platform, see references/platform-ranking-factors.md.

Key Difference from Traditional SEO

Traditional SEO gets you ranked. AI SEO gets you cited.

In traditional search, you need to rank on page 1. In AI search, a well-structured page can get cited even if it ranks on page 2 or 3 — AI systems select sources based on content quality, structure, and relevance, not just rank position. Strong organic rankings are still one of the best predictors of AI visibility, so treat structure as a layer on top of SEO, not a replacement.

Critical stats (they drift; re-check before quoting to a client, and distrust vendor stats with no source or date):

  • AI Overviews appeared on ~48% of the queries BrightEdge tracks (BrightEdge, Feb 2026), and position-one desktop CTR fell ~58% when one was present (Ahrefs, Dec 2025 data). Both are sample-specific, so don't forecast a site's traffic loss from them
  • Adding statistics and citations raised visibility by roughly 30–40% in the original GEO study (Aggarwal et al., 2023)

Google's Official Stance vs. Multi-Platform Reality

This is important to read once before doing anything else.

Google's position (AI features optimization guide):

"The best practices for SEO continue to be relevant because our generative AI features on Google Search are rooted in our core Search ranking and quality systems."

Google explicitly says:

  • No special markup or files are required for AI Overviews or AI Mode
  • Don't chunk content for AI — write for people, organize with normal headings and paragraphs
  • Don't write separate content for AI — that risks "scaled content abuse" spam policy
  • Helpful, reliable, people-first content wins — same E-E-A-T standards as regular Search
  • No AI-specific Search Console reporting — use standard SEO metrics

Other AI engines (ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Copilot) behave differently:

  • They actively reward extractable structure — passages, FAQs, comparison tables, definition blocks
  • They parse llms.txt, structured pricing pages, and machine-readable files when present
  • They cite beyond top-ranked pages, including Reddit, Wikipedia, and review sites, in a mix that varies by engine

What this means for the work:

  • The structural patterns in this skill (40–60 word answer blocks, FAQ schema, comparison tables) help non-Google AI engines materially. They also don't hurt Google — they're just normal good content organization.
  • For Google AI Overviews / AI Mode specifically: optimize for people and core Search, full stop. Strong E-E-A-T, original information, semantic HTML, clean indexability.
  • For ChatGPT/Claude/Perplexity: layer on the extractable structure + llms.txt + machine-readable files. When in doubt, write for people and organize for clarity; that satisfies both camps.

Query Fan-Out (Google AI Search)

Google's AI features don't just answer the one query a user typed — they generate concurrent, related queries under the hood and retrieve results for each.

Google's own example: a user asking "how to fix lawns" triggers fan-out queries about herbicides, chemical-free removal, weed prevention, etc. The AI synthesizes across all of them.

Implications:

  • Single-page-per-keyword targeting is less effective. Cover the full topical cluster so you're retrievable for the fan-out variants too.
  • Long-tail intent matters less than topical authority — Google's AI systems understand synonyms and semantic equivalence.
  • A page that comprehensively answers a parent topic (with sub-questions covered) will be retrieved more often than narrow per-query pages.

Action: when planning content, brainstorm the 5–10 related queries the AI is likely to fan out to and make sure your content (or your site as a whole) covers them, with one owning page per fact family (matrix in references/content-patterns.md).

ChatGPT fans out too — and you can extract its literal background queries for your niche via DevTools (method in references/format-volatility.md). Post-5.6, ChatGPT's fan-outs shifted away from "best/vs/top" modifiers toward site: and "official" searches — use the extraction to see where your category's fan-outs stand today.


AI Visibility Audit

Before optimizing, assess your current AI search presence.

Step 1: Check AI Answers for Your Key Queries

Test 10-20 of your most important queries across platforms:

QueryGoogle AI OverviewChatGPTPerplexityYou Cited?Competitors Cited?
[query 1]Yes/NoYes/NoYes/NoYes/No[who]
[query 2]Yes/NoYes/NoYes/NoYes/No[who]

Query types to test, spread across buyer awareness stages and written the way people actually type into a chat box:

  • Problem-aware: "How do I [problem your product solves]?"
  • Solution-aware: "What is [your product category]?" / "Best [category] for [use case]"
  • Product-aware: "[Your brand] vs [competitor]" / "Is [your brand] good for [use case]?"
  • Most aware: "[Your brand] pricing" / "Does [your brand] integrate with [tool]?"

Keep the list to prompts that would change revenue. A citation for a glossary question ("what is gross profit?") rarely sells anything. Track prompts like keywords: collapse wording variants of the same intent into one core prompt, then run each several times.

Step 2: Analyze Citation Patterns

When your competitors get cited and you don't, examine:

  • Content structure — Is their content more extractable?
  • Authority signals — Do they have more citations, stats, expert quotes?
  • Freshness — Is their content more recently updated?
  • Schema markup — Do they have structured data you're missing?
  • Third-party presence — Are they cited via Wikipedia, Reddit, review sites?

Turn findings into work. If an assistant states something wrong or vague about you, the page that should state that fact isn't saying it plainly; fix that page first. If you're absent, the sources it cites for the prompt are your target list for PR, review sites, and directories.

Step 3: Content Extractability Check

For each priority page, verify:

CheckPass/Fail
Clear definition in first paragraph?
Self-contained answer blocks (work without surrounding context)?
Statistics with sources cited?
Comparison tables for "[X] vs [Y]" queries?
FAQ section with natural-language questions?
Schema markup (FAQ, HowTo, Article, Product)?
Expert attribution (author name, credentials)?
Recently updated (within 6 months)?
Heading structure matches query patterns?
AI crawler policy matches discovery and training goals?

Step 4: AI Bot Access Check

Audit AI user agents by purpose. Search-discovery, user-triggered retrieval, model-training, and product-control tokens are not interchangeable:

  • Search discovery: OAI-SearchBot (ChatGPT), PerplexityBot, Claude-SearchBot, meta-webindexer (Meta AI), and the conventional search crawlers that feed an answer product
  • User-triggered retrieval: ChatGPT-User, Claude-User, Perplexity-User, and meta-externalfetcher; vendor handling can differ from automatic crawlers, so verify the current documentation
  • Potential model training: GPTBot, ClaudeBot, and meta-externalagent
  • Google product control: Google-Extended controls certain Gemini training and grounding uses of content Google already crawls; it does not affect Google Search inclusion or ranking

Check each relevant user-agent group and any WAF or CDN rules separately. A publisher can allow search discovery while disallowing model-development crawlers; do not infer that blocking a training crawler necessarily blocks citations. See references/platform-ranking-factors.md for the full robots.txt configuration.


Optimization Strategy

The Three Pillars

1. Structure (make it extractable)
2. Authority (make it citable)
3. Presence (be where AI looks)

Pillar 1: Structure — Make Content Extractable

AI systems extract passages, not pages. Every key claim should work as a standalone statement.

Content block patterns:

  • Definition blocks for "What is X?" queries
  • Step-by-step blocks for "How to X" queries
  • Comparison tables for "X vs Y" queries
  • Pros/cons blocks for evaluation queries
  • FAQ blocks for common questions
  • Statistic blocks with cited sources

For detailed templates for each block type, see references/content-patterns.md.

Structural rules:

  • Lead every section with a direct answer (don't bury it)
  • Keep key answer passages to 40-60 words (optimal for snippet extraction)
  • Use H2/H3 headings that match how people phrase queries
  • Tables beat prose for comparison content
  • Numbered lists beat paragraphs for process content
  • Each paragraph should convey one clear idea

Pillar 2: Authority — Make Content Citable

AI systems prefer sources they can trust. Build citation-worthiness.

The Princeton GEO research (KDD 2024, studied across Perplexity.ai) ranked 9 optimization methods:

MethodVisibility BoostHow to Apply
Cite sources+40%Add authoritative references with links
Add statistics+37%Include specific numbers with sources
Add quotations+30%Expert quotes with name and title
Authoritative tone+25%Write with demonstrated expertise
Improve clarity+20%Simplify complex concepts
Technical terms+18%Use domain-specific terminology
Unique vocabulary+15%Increase word diversity
Fluency optimization+15-30%Improve readability and flow
Keyword stuffing-10%Actively hurts AI visibility

Best combination: Fluency + Statistics = maximum boost. Low-ranking sites benefit even more — up to 115% visibility increase with citations.

Statistics and data (+37-40% citation boost)

  • Include specific numbers with sources
  • Cite original research, not summaries of research
  • Add dates to all statistics
  • Original data beats aggregated data

Expert attribution (+25-30% citation boost)

  • Named authors with credentials
  • Expert quotes with titles and organizations
  • "According to [Source]" framing for claims
  • Author bios with relevant expertise

Freshness signals

  • "Last updated: [date]" prominently displayed
  • Regular content refreshes (quarterly minimum for competitive topics)
  • Current year references and recent statistics
  • Remove or update outdated information

E-E-A-T alignment

  • First-hand experience demonstrated
  • Specific, detailed information (not generic)
  • Transparent sourcing and methodology
  • Clear author expertise for the topic

Pillar 3: Presence — Be Where AI Looks

AI systems cite your own site and the places that talk about you, in proportions that vary by engine and category. In one large dataset, company sites took about 57% of citations (ChatGPT 47%, Gemini 69%; Profound, July 2026), while shortlist recommendations lean on third-party consensus. Measure your category's citation mix before choosing channels; see references/citations-vs-recommendations.md.

Third-party surfaces to cover:

  • Wikipedia (7.8% of ChatGPT citations in Profound's Aug 2024–Jun 2025 data)
  • Reddit (1.8% in the same data, then nearly wiped from ChatGPT by Aug 2026 retrieval changes; still retrieved elsewhere; see the volatility section in references/agent-readiness.md)
  • Industry publications and guest posts
  • LinkedIn — among the most-cited domains for professional queries, but which surface gets cited depends on the engine (ChatGPT now favors posts over articles; Gemini barely cites LinkedIn). Front-load the target phrase, since a post's first words become its URL slug. See references/linkedin-ai-citations.md
  • Review sites (G2, Capterra, TrustRadius for B2B SaaS)
  • YouTube (frequently cited by Google AI Overviews)
  • Podcasts (episodes get transcribed, show notes published — both get crawled and cited)
  • Quora answers

Actions:

  • Ensure your Wikipedia page is accurate and current
  • Participate authentically in Reddit communities — but as one surface in a portfolio, never the whole strategy (citation mixes shift overnight with retrieval updates)
  • Get featured in industry roundups and comparison articles
  • Make every third-party profile (G2, Capterra, Gartner, Crunchbase, LinkedIn) describe you with the same segment and positioning as your About page; models look for consensus. For repositioning, mergers, and head terms, see references/positioning-and-consensus.md
  • Create YouTube content for key how-to queries — models don't watch the video, they read the text layer around it; see references/youtube-ai-citations.md for the full anatomy (transcript, captions, chapters, description, pinned comment)
  • Guest on podcasts in your category (prep with the public-relations skill's podcast guest prep)
  • Answer relevant Quora questions with depth

Machine-Readable Files for AI Agents

Google's stance: not required for AI Overviews or AI Mode. Their guide explicitly says you don't need new markup, AI files, or markdown to appear in generative AI search.

Why include them anyway: non-Google AI engines (ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity) and autonomous buying agents do reward extractable structure. The files below help with those engines without harming Google.

AI agents aren't just answering questions — they're becoming buyers. When an AI agent evaluates tools on behalf of a user, it needs structured, parseable information. If your pricing is locked in a JavaScript-rendered page or a "contact sales" wall, agents will skip you and recommend competitors whose information they can actually read.

Audit this layer first: references/agent-readiness.md — the access/discovery/parseability checklist, free scoring tools (npx is-agentic, Frase's checker), Markdown content negotiation + Link headers, llms-full.txt, and the emerging agent-actionable layer (WebMCP).

Add these machine-readable files to your site root:

/pricing.md or /pricing.txt — Structured pricing data for AI agents

# Pricing — [Your Product Name]

## Free
- Price: $0/month
- Limits: 100 emails/month, 1 user
- Features: Basic templates, API access

## Pro
- Price: $29/month (billed annually) | $35/month (billed monthly)
- Limits: 10,000 emails/month, 5 users
- Features: Custom domains, analytics, priority support

## Enterprise
- Price: Custom — contact sales@example.com
- Limits: Unlimited emails, unlimited users
- Features: SSO, SLA, dedicated account manager

Why this matters now:

  • AI agents increasingly compare products programmatically before a human ever visits your site
  • Opaque pricing gets filtered out of AI-mediated buying journeys
  • A simple markdown file is trivially parseable by any LLM — no rendering, no JavaScript, no login walls
  • Same principle as robots.txt (for crawlers), llms.txt (for AI context), and AGENTS.md (for agent capabilities)

Best practices:

  • Use consistent units (monthly vs. annual, per-seat vs. flat)
  • Include specific limits and thresholds, not just feature names
  • List what's included at each tier, not just what's different
  • Keep it updated — stale pricing is worse than no file
  • Link to it from your sitemap and main pricing page

/llms.txt — Context file for AI systems (see llmstxt.org)

If you don't have one yet, add an llms.txt that gives AI systems a quick overview of what your product does, who it's for, and links to key pages (including your pricing).

/okf/ — Open Knowledge Format bundle (Google-backed, v0.1)

Google introduced OKF in June 2026 — a markdown spec for representing site content as a directory of cross-linked files with YAML frontmatter, agent-readable without scraping. Built primarily for data-team catalog metadata; the site-readable-by-agents repurposing was popularized by Suganthan Mohanadasan. No confirmed AI-search ranking signal today — treat it as protocol-layer registration like early schema.org. For the full breakdown, implementation paths (free generator, WordPress plugin, by-hand), hosting guidance, and when to skip, see references/okf.md.

Schema Markup for AI

Structured data helps AI systems understand your content. Key schemas:

Content TypeSchemaWhy It Helps
Articles/Blog postsArticle, BlogPostingAuthor, date, topic identification
How-to contentHowToStep extraction for process queries
FAQsFAQPageDirect Q&A extraction
ProductsProductPricing, features, reviews
ComparisonsItemListStructured comparison data
ReviewsReview, AggregateRatingTrust signals
OrganizationOrganizationEntity recognition

No well-documented study isolates a schema lift on AI citations, so treat schema as context that helps engines parse your pages and expect no fixed lift from it. Google's note: structured data is "not required for generative AI search" but is recommended for overall SEO strategy. For implementation, use the schema skill.


Agentic Experiences

Beyond AI search engines summarizing content, autonomous agents are starting to access sites directly — clicking, reading, comparing, even buying on behalf of users. Google's guide flags this as an emerging category to plan for.

How agents access your site:

  • Visual rendering — they screenshot/read the page like a user would
  • DOM inspection — they parse the page's HTML structure
  • Accessibility tree — they rely on the same semantic information assistive tech uses (labels, roles, landmarks, headings)

What to do:

  • Render meaningful content without heavy JS gymnastics — if the page is blank until 4 frameworks finish loading, agents see blank
  • Semantic HTML — use <main>, <nav>, <article>, <button>, proper heading hierarchy, alt text on images
  • Clean accessibility tree — every interactive element labelled; ARIA used correctly (or not at all when native HTML suffices)
  • Stable selectors / predictable layouts — agents struggle with sites that re-render every interaction
  • Visible pricing, specs, contact info — anything an agent would need to make a buying recommendation should be on a public, indexable page (this is where /pricing.md and similar files help). Date the facts that change ("4.7 on G2 as of October 2026") so an agent can judge freshness
  • Proof as text — testimonials, ratings, and named customer logos in the HTML as text, not baked into images or injected by a widget script. If you can't select it with the mouse, an agent may not read it

Emerging — Universal Commerce Protocol (UCP): Google references UCP as a forthcoming protocol that will give agents standardized hooks for commerce interactions (catalog discovery, pricing, checkout). Watch for adoption; for now, the structural recommendations above are the precursor.

For ecom and local business specifically, Google highlights:

  • Merchant Center feeds + Google Business Profile for product/service visibility in AI Search
  • Business Agent for conversational customer engagement (where applicable)

Content Types That Get Cited Most

Not all content is equally citable — and the format mix is volatile. The long-standing baseline had comparison articles (~33%) and listicles (~10%) among the top citation earners, but ChatGPT 5.6 (Aug 2026) demoted the exploited formats: listicle citations fell −50.5% and comparison-page citations −32.1%, while site: and "official" retrieval surged — a shift toward primary sources and owned pages. Format strategy is now per-platform (comparisons still work on Google AIO/Gemini/Perplexity). See references/format-volatility.md for the shift data, the per-platform format table, LinkedIn's citation numbers, and the ChatGPT fan-out extraction diagnostic.

Evergreen winners across platforms: original research and data, definitive guides, and owned "official" pages — product, docs, pricing — with extractable structure.

Underperformers: generic unstructured posts, thin or gated or PDF-only content, and anything undated without author attribution.

Citation ≠ recommendation. Getting cited means your content was useful to consult; getting recommended — onto the buyer's actual shortlist — is governed by web-wide consensus (reviews, forums, analysts, press) and is largely independent of your own content. Self-promotional "best [category]" listicles can even backfire for emerging brands: in one 100-query B2B study, 69% of the AI Overview citations that self-promotional listicles earned came in answers that recommended competitors instead of the publishing brand. See references/citations-vs-recommendations.md for the visibility ladder (retrieved → cited → mentioned → recommended), stage-dependent buyer's-guide strategy, what earns recommendations, and the attribution blind spot.


Monitoring AI Visibility

What to Track

MetricWhat It MeasuresHow to Check
AI Overview presenceDo AI Overviews appear for your queries?Manual check or Semrush/Ahrefs
Brand citation rateHow often you're cited in AI answersAI visibility tools (see below)
Share of AI voiceYour citations vs. competitorsPeec AI, Otterly, ZipTie, Omnia
Citation sentimentHow AI describes your brandManual review + monitoring tools
Recommendation rateWhether you're on the shortlist, not just cited (see citations-vs-recommendations.md)Prompt tracking + mention framing
Source attributionWhich pages get cited, and what AI exposure does downstreamAI referrals plus delayed branded and direct visits (ai-attribution.md)

AI Visibility Monitoring Tools

ToolCoverageBest For
Otterly AIChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI OverviewsShare of AI voice tracking
Peec AIChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, Copilot+Multi-platform monitoring at scale
ZipTieGoogle AI Overviews, ChatGPT, PerplexityBrand mention + sentiment tracking
LLMrefsChatGPT, Perplexity, AI Overviews, GeminiSEO keyword → AI visibility mapping
Profound, Ahrefs Brand Radar, SemrushMajor assistants and Google AI surfacesLarger programs: cited sources, answer text, prompt demand (Profound's studies are cited in the references as vendor research)
OmniaGoogle AI Mode, Google AI Overviews, ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, CopilotAI visibility monitoring

DIY Monitoring (No Tools)

Monthly manual check:

  1. Pick your top 20 queries
  2. Run each through ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google
  3. Record: Are you cited? Who is? What page? Log it in a spreadsheet and track month-over-month

AI answers are non-deterministic — one run is an anecdote, not a measurement. Run each query 3–5 times per platform and track the mention rate with its sample size ("cited 3/5, n=5"), comparing rates over time rather than single runs. Full rigor checklist in references/format-volatility.md.

Search Console expectations

Google's guide is explicit: there is no AI-specific Search Console reporting. AI Overviews and AI Mode use core Search ranking, so the standard Search Console reports (Performance, Coverage, Core Web Vitals) are still what you measure with for Google. The third-party tools above are the only way to see cross-platform AI citation behavior.


What NOT to Do

Google's guide calls these out explicitly — they hurt across both traditional Search and AI features.

  1. Write separate content "for AI". Same content should serve people and AI. Writing variants targeted at AI systems risks the scaled content abuse spam policy — Google's words.
  2. Chunk pages into AI-bait fragments. Google's guide is direct: "Don't break your content into tiny pieces for AI to better understand it." Use normal paragraph + heading structure.
  3. Generate at scale for ranking manipulation. AI-generated content is fine if it meets Search Essentials and spam policies. Mass-producing thin variations does not.
  4. Pursue inauthentic mentions. Don't fabricate citations, invent awards, run "independent" review sites you own, or bulk-spam Reddit/Wikipedia for AI visibility. Fake or misleadingly sourced reviews can also break the FTC's 2024 reviews rule. Real participation only.
  5. Treat every AI user agent as the same control. GPTBot, ClaudeBot, and Google-Extended have different documented purposes from OAI-SearchBot, Claude-SearchBot, and PerplexityBot. Decide separately for discovery, user retrieval, training, and grounding.
  6. Hide your main content behind JS that doesn't render. Both core Search and AI agents need to see your content; JS-only rendering loses both audiences.
  7. Skip E-E-A-T fundamentals. Author identity, first-hand experience, expertise signals, transparent sourcing — Google's guide leans heavily on these for AI features.

AI SEO by Content Type

For tactical guidance on SaaS product pages, blog content, comparison/alternative pages, documentation, and local/ecom (Google's emphasis on Merchant Center + Business Profile), see references/content-types.md.


Common Mistakes

  • Ignoring AI search entirely — AI Overviews appear on roughly half of tracked queries in many industries (BrightEdge, Feb 2026), and assistant usage keeps growing
  • Treating AI SEO as separate from SEO — Good traditional SEO is the foundation; AI SEO adds structure and authority on top
  • Writing for AI, not humans — If content reads like it was written to game an algorithm, it won't get cited or convert
  • No freshness signals — Undated content loses to dated content because AI systems weight recency heavily. Show when content was last updated
  • Gating all content — AI can't access gated content. Keep your most authoritative content open
  • Ignoring third-party presence — Shortlist recommendations lean on what reviews, forums, and press say about you, even where your own site earns most citations
  • No structured data — Schema markup gives AI systems structured context about your content
  • Keyword stuffing — Unlike traditional SEO where it's just ineffective, keyword stuffing actively reduces AI visibility by 10% (Princeton GEO study)
  • Hiding pricing behind "contact sales" or JS-rendered pages — AI agents evaluating your product on behalf of buyers can't parse what they can't read. Add a /pricing.md file
  • Blocking discovery crawlers without checking their purpose — Restricting OAI-SearchBot, PerplexityBot, or Claude-SearchBot may reduce search visibility; training controls are separate
  • Generic content without data — "We're the best" won't get cited. "Our customers see 3x improvement in [metric]" will
  • Forgetting to monitor — You can't improve what you don't measure. Check AI visibility monthly at minimum

Tool Integrations

For implementation, see the tools registry.

ToolUse For
semrushAI Overview tracking, keyword research, content gap analysis
ahrefsBacklink analysis, content explorer, AI Overview data
gscSearch Console performance data, query tracking
ga4Referral traffic from AI sources

Related Skills

  • seo-audit: For traditional technical and on-page SEO audits; link-building for earning links and mentions on the third-party pages AI engines cite
  • schema: For implementing structured data that helps AI understand your content
  • content-strategy: For planning what content to create
  • competitors: For building comparison pages that get cited
  • programmatic-seo: For building SEO pages at scale
  • copywriting: For writing content that's both human-readable and AI-extractable
  • lead-magnets: For packaging an owned course or content library as an installable agent skill (different from public-site AI visibility)

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

ab-testing

免费有简介

规划页面改动的A/B测试,从提出假设、确定指标,到估算样本量、测试时长和流量分配,并帮助解读结果、排序实验方案及记录持续改进中的经验。

  • 比较标题或注册按钮
  • 估算样本量和测试时长
  • 检查结果及可能的不利影响
coreyhaines31/marketingskills5.6万2026年10月23日 更新

ad-creative

免费有简介

为不同广告平台撰写标题、正文及静态或视频创意方案。结合投放表现和顾客反馈拓展文案,检查格式限制,并制定可衡量的测试假设,用于下一轮优化。

  • 撰写符合字数限制的搜索广告
  • 根据广告表现开发新方案
  • 依据顾客评价策划静态广告
coreyhaines31/marketingskills5.6万2026年10月23日 更新

ads

免费有简介

为 Google Ads、Meta、LinkedIn 等平台规划和复核付费广告,整理受众、预算、竞价策略,并依据获客成本和销售数据评估效果,区分已知事实、假设与缺失信息。

  • 选择广告平台并分配预算
  • 根据投放结果决定后续行动
  • 排查搜索广告中的无效支出
coreyhaines31/marketingskills5.6万2026年10月23日 更新

analytics

免费有简介

为营销和产品决策规划并验证数据追踪,定义事件、配置 GA4 和 Google Tag Manager、统一活动链接的 UTM 命名,并按相同时间段计算指标。

  • 规划注册与购买事件追踪
  • 排查事件未发送或重复
  • 统一活动链接的 UTM 命名
coreyhaines31/marketingskills5.6万2026年10月23日 更新

aso

免费有简介

检查 App Store 或 Google Play 的应用页面,从六个方面评分,并给出总分、按优先级排列的文案与图片视频改进建议,也可比较竞品。

  • 通过商店链接诊断页面
  • 改进应用名称或说明
  • 检查截图和预览视频
coreyhaines31/marketingskills5.6万2026年10月23日 更新

attribution

免费有简介

分析广告、搜索和口碑如何影响转化与收入,比较归因模型并梳理不同工具的数字差异。也可设计自有跟踪方案,把匿名浏览记录与预约或购买关联起来。

  • 梳理广告、分析和客户管理数据差异
  • 比较首次触点与末次触点模型
  • 设计口碑来源调查
coreyhaines31/marketingskills5.6万2026年10月23日 更新

查看 coreyhaines31 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题