AI visibility

How to run a full AEO audit

aeo-audit a saved expert workflow your assistant follows, in Claude, ChatGPT or Cursor

The full AI-search audit: citation rate, share of voice, mentions and sentiment per answer engine, per-competitor standings, which URLs earn citations, prompt-level coverage gaps, branded/non-branded and geo/intent cuts, an exec-ready deliverable.

Try it

run an AEO audit

Private beta Part of the quattr-ai-search plugin, rolling out org by org. Request access ↗

Say any of these

AEO audit
AI visibility audit
how visible are we in ChatGPT/Perplexity/Gemini
audit our AI search presence
GEO audit
agentic search audit
where do we stand in AI answers
full AI report

You never name the skill or a tool, the assistant routes on what you asked. These are the phrasings it recognises for this one.

And when it stays out of the way

Not for a quick AI number ("citation rate this week"), for Google AI Overviews on-SERP questions alone, or for "why did citations drop" (anomaly-investigator).

Use it instead of search-pulse when depth on AI search is wanted; use search-pulse instead for the headline.

What it runs

ai_visibility_overview
ai_visibility_competitors
ai_visibility_trend
ai_page_citations
ai_citation_attribution
ai_prompt_coverage_gap
ai_prompt_winners
ai_visibility_drilldown

8 governed analyses, composed and scoped for you. Named here for transparency, not because you have to ask for them.

The numbers behind it

What it refuses to do

Never leave a blended branded+non-branded number on screen: the split is the audit's spine.
Prompt baskets are generated from first-party demand and replayed as sampled baskets; where citations are absent engines fall back to Google grounding, say so when a cell is sparse rather than inventing a reason. The preflight's basket-delta is the sampling-frame check: a materially changed basket means period comparisons need a same-panel read or an explicit rebaseline.
Off-site reality check: a large share of citation inventory is third-party content, a coverage gap is not automatically an "add a page" recommendation; say when the winning citations are earned media.
Every prompt→domain→URL claim in the output must come from one keyed ai_prompt_winners row. If the verb is unavailable, present client gaps and domain-wide leader pages as two separate sections and say the per-prompt join is not available, never simulate it.

What the answer looks like

Skill: The full answer-engine audit. Simulated · illustrative

Where do we stand in AI answers?

Analysis plan, every step, resolved for you

Routed to the governed workflowaeo-audit
Scope resolved before filteringsegment: AI Tracker · Jul 1 to Jul 31, 2026
4 analyses queued in parallelai_visibility_overview · ai_visibility_competitors · ai_page_citations · ai_prompt_coverage_gap
Honesty gates armedscope echo · freshness

Cited on 18.4% of tracked prompts, up on the month, but two engines carry all of the growth.

Citation rate: 18.4% ▲ +1.2 pts answer engines, tracked prompts
SOV: 12.6% ▲ +0.8 pts answer-engine citations vs tracked competitors
Top cited URL: /guides/getting-started 34 citations in July
Coverage gaps: 61 prompts zero citations while rivals are cited

Jul 1 to Jul 31, 2026 vs Jun 2026segment: AI Tracker

⚠ Observationalas of Aug 1, 2026 (AI visibility loads daily)IllustrativeOpen in Quattr ↗

Perplexity and Gemini drove the gain; ChatGPT is flat, the 61-prompt gap list is the next content sprint.

A simulated conversation on fictional data. Scope, freshness and the ⚠ Observational marker are attached by the same director that renders every demo here, not written by hand.

Want this Skill running on your own accounts? Every Quattr customer works with an AI Search Strategist who sets it up with you.

Consult an expert