Can AI engines
actually find you?
Nine questions about your own setup, scored against the inputs that correlate with being mentioned and cited by AI assistants. It takes about three minutes and it is honest about what it is — an assessment of your answers, not a scan of your site.
What this tool does and does not do
It scores the answers you give below. It does not crawl your website, query any AI engine, or measure your actual citation rate — no free tool can do that credibly, because measuring it properly requires running hundreds of prompts across multiple engines. Tools that return a “citation score” the moment you type a domain are showing you a number they invented. For a real measurement, see our GEO testing protocol.
Nine questions, weighted
Weightings reflect how much each input matters in our own GEO engagements. They are our judgement, not a published study.
Is your company described identically across your site, LinkedIn, Crunchbase and industry directories?
Conflicting descriptions make it harder for a model to resolve what your company is and does.
Do you have a valid Organization schema graph with sameAs links to your verified profiles?
Structured data is the most direct statement of identity a machine can read.
Do your key pages answer specific questions in self-contained passages under question-shaped headings?
Passages that reference “the section above” cannot be lifted into an answer.
Does your important content render server-side rather than requiring JavaScript execution?
Content that only appears after client-side rendering is frequently missed by AI crawlers.
Does your robots.txt allow the AI crawlers you want to be cited by?
Several sites block GPTBot or similar agents by default and then wonder why they are absent.
Have you published original data, benchmarks or research that exists nowhere else?
Models paraphrase consensus content and cite the source of unique information.
Is your content attributed to named experts with verifiable credentials?
Anonymous content is discounted in exactly the categories where trust matters most.
Do you have a meaningful presence on the review platforms your category uses?
Review platforms are heavily represented in the sources models retrieve from.
Are you mentioned on independent sites — press, industry publications, comparison articles?
Self-published claims carry far less weight than third-party corroboration.
0 of 9 answered
Your score and the four highest-impact gaps appear here once every question has an answer.
Why these nine inputs
Grouped into the four things that determine whether a model can find you, understand you, value you and trust you.
Entity clarity
Can a model resolve what your company is? Inconsistent descriptions across sources are the most common reason a brand fails to enter a recommendation set at all.
Extractability
Can the content be retrieved and lifted? Client-side rendering, blocked crawlers and passages that depend on surrounding context all break this.
Information gain
Is there anything worth citing? Models paraphrase consensus and attribute unique information, so original data is what earns a link rather than a mention.
Corroboration
Does anyone else say it? Third-party mentions and review presence carry substantially more weight than anything you publish about yourself.
About this assessment
Does this tool actually check my website?
No, and that is deliberate. It scores the answers you provide about your own setup. Nothing is crawled, no AI engine is queried and no domain is analysed. A free instant tool cannot credibly measure AI citation, because doing so requires running hundreds of prompts across several engines and coding the responses.
Why do other tools give me a citation score instantly?
Because they are estimating from proxies, or inventing the number outright. Genuine measurement means sampling repeatedly across engines, since the same prompt returns different answers on different runs. Any tool returning a precise citation percentage the moment you type a domain has not measured anything.
How were the weightings decided?
From our own GEO engagement experience — which inputs, when fixed, most often preceded improvement in measured mention and citation rates. They are our professional judgement, not the output of a published study, and we label them that way rather than implying more rigour than exists.
What does a high score actually mean?
That the conditions correlating with AI citation are largely in place. It does not mean you are being cited. Those are different claims, and conflating them is the core dishonesty in most tools of this kind. A strong score is a reason to measure, not a substitute for measuring.
Is my data stored or sent anywhere?
No. The assessment runs entirely in your browser, nothing is transmitted to us, and there is no email gate. If you close the tab the answers are gone. We would rather you use the tool than trade it for a contact record.
What should I fix first?
Generally extractability, because it is a hard blocker rather than a soft one. If AI crawlers are blocked in robots.txt or your content only renders client-side, nothing else you do can compensate. After that, entity clarity is usually the fastest meaningful improvement.
How often should I reassess?
Quarterly is sensible for the self-assessment, since the inputs change slowly. Actual citation measurement should run monthly against a fixed prompt set, because engine behaviour shifts far faster than your website does.
Replace the estimate with a measurement
A baseline GEO cycle runs 100 prompts across five engines, five times each — 2,500 coded observations — and returns your actual mention rate, citation rate and prominence, including every prompt where you did not appear.