Get your brand cited by AI — ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, Google AI Overviews, AI Mode, Bing Copilot, and GrokChatGPTGeminiPerplexityClaudeAI OverviewsAI ModeBing CopilotGrok

Run a GEO scan and get a visibility score from 0 to 100, verbatim citation snippets, and a side-by-side competitor read-out across all eight engines. That baseline is where every answer engine optimization (AEO) program starts.

Grade any URL on two scores, Citability and AI Readability: 21 signals covering schema markup, AI bot access, JavaScript rendering, freshness, and answer-first formatting, each benchmarked against the pages AI actually cites. AI crawlers can't cite what they can't read. The audit maps every signal to a specific fix.

Brief and draft content AI will actually quote. You get a framework-aware outline (pillar, cluster, comparison, or FAQ), an entity checklist, competitor facts coverage, and dual Structure and AI Readiness scoring. Answer-first content, built to earn citations.

Run a baseline scan, ship your changes, re-scan. GEO Toolbox keeps scan history so you can see the before/after visibility score, new citation snippets you picked up, and which engines moved. Schedule weekly or monthly auto-scans to watch the trend line in Domain Overview. Indexing speed varies by engine, but every scan cycle makes progress observable.

Three names for the same job: being the source AI engines cite when your customer asks a question. Generative engine optimization (GEO) covers the full workflow across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Bing Copilot, and Grok. Answer engine optimization (AEO) focuses on earning citations in answer engines specifically. LLM SEO is the crawler-facing work: robots.txt, schema markup, entity clarity, and bot access. GEO Toolbox covers all three.

ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Bing Copilot, and Grok. They are tracked separately because they disagree: the same prompt routinely earns a citation on one engine and nothing on another, so a single blended “AI visibility” number hides the engine that is actually costing you customers. Every scan reports each engine on its own line. Plans differ in how many run at once — Starter covers three, Plus lets you pick five, Pro runs all eight.

Yes — scheduled tracking runs across 29 markets. Market matters more in AI search than it did in classic search, because an answer engine will happily cite a local competitor in response to a Spanish prompt while citing you in response to the English one. Running the same prompt set per market is what separates visibility that is genuinely global from visibility that stops at a border.

On the evidence we have seen, no — and we say that despite shipping both an llms.txt checker and a generator ourselves. We have found no public evidence that a major answer engine uses llms.txt as a ranking or citation input. It is cheap hygiene worth having, because agent-readiness audits look for it and it costs nothing to publish, but it is not the lever people hope it is. What demonstrably matters is whether crawlers can reach and read your pages at all, and whether those pages answer the question directly.

No, and the two are not substitutes. A rank tracker tells you where a URL sits in a list of links. An AI answer usually names two or three sources and never shows the list, so you can hold position one and still be absent from the answer your customer actually reads. Most of classic SEO still pays — crawlability, entity clarity, genuinely useful pages — it is just measured differently. What GEO Toolbox deliberately does not do is keyword rank tracking, backlink analysis, or site-speed auditing; keep a general SEO suite for those.

Run the Agent Readiness scan, or the free AI Crawler Checker if you only want the robots.txt answer. Blocking is more common than people expect: a WAF rule or a bot-management default can refuse GPTBot, ClaudeBot, or Google-Extended without anyone deciding to, and a page a crawler cannot fetch will never be cited however good it is. The scan also catches the quieter version of the same problem — content that only exists after JavaScript has run.

Partly, and it is worth being precise about the limits. Connect Google Search Console and GA4 and you can see referral traffic from AI surfaces next to your organic data. What no tool can honestly give you is a complete, deterministic attribution table: some engines send no referrer, many answers are read without any click at all, and prompts are not keywords. Treat citation share as the leading indicator and referral traffic as the lagging one.

Agent readiness is whether an AI agent — not a person, not a classic crawler — can enter your site, read it, and act on it. It is the plumbing: real HTTP status codes, content that exists without JavaScript, structured data an agent can parse, machine-readable indexes, and error pages that tell an agent where to go next. It matters now because traffic that used to arrive as a click increasingly arrives as an agent fetching a page on someone’s behalf, and a site that only works in a browser is invisible to it.

Every plan draws on one shared credit pool that all fourteen tools spend from, so a scan, a brief and a report all draw on the same allowance. A check against a heavier engine costs more credits than a lighter one, credits refill monthly, and you can top up at any time. Starter is $99/month with a 7-day free trial. Every tier, limit, and engine count is published on the pricing page rather than kept behind a sales call.