Built for AI specialists, agencies, and consultancies

SEO for AI specialists and AI agencies.

Your buyers live in ChatGPT and Perplexity. They will trust your audit only if you can defend every score with a primary-source citation. Audit your agency for AI crawler readability, render-parity, the schema graph that LLMs actually read, and the methodology depth a technical buyer will respect.

Built for AI consultancies, prompt engineering studios, RAG-as-a-service shops, fine-tuning specialists, and partner-directory agencies (Anthropic, OpenAI, Google): the render-parity, schema, and entity-graph gaps that suppress citation rate on AI-buyer queries.

The diagnosis

Why generic SEO advice fails AI agencies.

Three failure modes we see on roughly nine out of ten AI agencies we audit. Each is structural to the vertical, not random.

The generic playbook

What is actually true for this vertical

How our audit covers it

Generic playbook

Most AI agency sites are SPAs that render their service descriptions and case studies via React after hydration. AI crawlers see the empty version.

Reality

GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, OAI-SearchBot, and ChatGPT-User do not execute JavaScript in their production fetch paths (documented in OpenAI, Anthropic, and Perplexity crawler docs). A Next.js or Vite SPA that ships an empty <div id="root"> in the raw HTML is invisible to the very engines your buyers use to find you.

Our coverage

AI Visibility pillar treats render-parity diff as HIGH severity for ai_agencies (severity-override in the adapter). We compare raw HTML token count to rendered DOM token count, flag any page where AI sees less than 70 percent of what humans see, and ship a paste-ready Server Components or static-export fix per page type.

Generic playbook

Generic SEO audits treat "AI Visibility" as a content-quality score. Your buyers want to see methodology depth: per-engine citation tracking, per-query share-of-voice against the named agencies they are comparing you against.

Reality

A technical buyer evaluating an AI agency will not trust a single "AI Visibility: 72" number. They want to see the cited-answer rate per engine, the named competitors they were compared against, the verbatim mention from each engine, and the source the engine cited instead of you when it did not pick you.

Our coverage

Per-engine, per-query citation tracking across ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini, AIO. The report surfaces verbatim mention text, source citation, and the named competitor cited instead of you on each missed query. The methodology page for AI citation tracking documents the polling cadence, the engines version-pinned where possible, and the limitations.

Generic playbook

Horizontal tools rank you against a horizontal Top-10. Your buyers are choosing between a16z-portfolio agencies, Anthropic partner directory listings, OpenAI partner directory listings, and a handful of named AI consultancies.

Reality

The competitive ring for "best AI consultancy for [use case]" is tight and named: Anthropic-listed partners, OpenAI-listed partners, the a16z portfolio cluster, plus a few independent firms with strong technical-blog reputations (Inkeep, Mendable, Vellum, and similar). Generic competitive analysis surfaces noise.

Our coverage

Vertical-aware competitor set baked into the audit (a16z portfolio, Anthropic + OpenAI partner directories, top 5 named consultancies). Citation share, schema density, and entity-graph density compared explicitly against the right ring, not a horizontal Top-10.

The checks, vertical-tailored

What the audit checks for AI agencies.

Every audit, on every plan, scores Foundational SEO, Technical SEO and AI Visibility. Local SEO is scored when the pages we read show a physical location or a service area, such as a street address, a city and state or a Maps link. The check definitions are constant; the severity, the recommended fix, the competitor set, and the example code shift per vertical via the adapter.

Foundational pillar

Foundational

Keyword universe, content depth, on-page structure, internal link graph.

  • h1-presence

    Service landing pages should lead with a single, specific H1 ("Anthropic-certified RAG implementation for B2B SaaS") not a generic "We do AI". Specificity is the credibility signal a technical buyer reads first.

  • passage-extractability

    Every methodology post should carry 134-167 word "What is [technique]?", "When should you use [technique] over [alternative]?", "How do you evaluate [technique]?" answer blocks co-located under question-shaped H2 so ChatGPT and Perplexity can lift the passage verbatim.

  • outbound-link-quality

    Cite the arXiv paper that introduced the technique you describe, the schema.org spec for any structured-output claim, the Anthropic / OpenAI / Vertex docs for any model claim. Outbound authority to primary sources is the highest-leverage trust signal for the AI-savvy buyer.

Technical pillar

Technical

Crawl, render, schema validation, Core Web Vitals, render-parity diff.

  • js-render-parity

    If your agency site is a Next.js app routed with the App Router and your service pages live under client components, the raw HTML is empty. AI crawlers see nothing. The audit flags it (severity HIGH for ai_agencies) and recommends moving the page to a Server Component or static export with the content in the initial HTML.

  • schema-validation

    Organization + Service + Person + Article JSON-LD must validate against schema.org. For Service, populate serviceType (specific: "Retrieval-Augmented Generation", "Model Fine-Tuning", "Agent Orchestration"), provider (Organization), areaServed (Worldwide is fine for remote-first agencies), and offers if you publish pricing.

  • core-web-vitals

    Agency case-study pages are content-heavy and image-heavy (architecture diagrams, code snippets, screenshots). LCP below 2.0s requires image optimization, font-display swap, and (ideally) static export with edge caching. The audit measures lab + field data where CrUX coverage exists.

Local pillar

Local

On-site local signals: LocalBusiness schema, Maps link, phone and address, service-area pages.

  • local-business-schema

    Remote-first AI agencies do not need LocalBusiness schema. The audit marks local-pillar checks as N/A for ai_agencies (configured in the adapter's severity overrides), so absence carries no penalty. The pillar shows as "N/A" rather than 100/100 to avoid implying a passed check that does not apply.

  • nap-consistency

    N/A for fully remote agencies. If your site lists a HQ city, the audit reads the page for a complete phone, street address, and ZIP code. It does not compare your LinkedIn, Crunchbase, or partner-directory listings.

AI Visibility pillar

AI Visibility

AI crawler readability, schema for AI, passage extractability, entity graph.

  • ai-crawler-readability

    Render-parity diff per page. Raw HTML token count vs rendered DOM token count. AI engines (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot) fetch raw HTML; any page where AI sees less than 70 percent of what humans see is flagged HIGH severity for ai_agencies and a Server Components / static-export fix is recommended per page.

  • passage-extractability

    A 134-167 word passage co-located under a question-shaped H2 is the format ChatGPT and Perplexity lift verbatim. For an AI agency, structuring case studies and methodology posts in this shape roughly doubles citation rate on technical-buyer queries.

  • entity-graph

    Organization sameAs to your Anthropic partner directory listing, OpenAI partner directory listing, Vertex AI partner directory listing, GitHub organization page, Hugging Face organization page, LinkedIn company page, and Crunchbase. AI engines triangulate AI-agency authority through this graph; partial graphs measurably suppress citation rate.

Sample findings

What a AI specialists and AI agencies finding looks like.

Three illustrative findings in the format a AI specialists and AI agencies audit produces. Each carries a severity, a confidence flag, and a link to the methodology page that justifies the score.

highconf high

AI Visibility pillar

Render-parity diff: AI crawlers see 22 percent of homepage content

Your homepage ships an empty <div id="root"> in raw HTML and renders the hero, service grid, and case studies via React after hydration. GPTBot, ClaudeBot, and PerplexityBot fetch raw HTML and see almost nothing. Citation rate on ChatGPT for "best RAG agency" is 0 percent vs Anthropic-listed-partner average of 8 percent. The fix is moving the homepage to a Server Component or static export.

Methodology →
highconf high

Foundational pillar

Service schema absent; AI engines cannot resolve your service catalog

Your site publishes Organization JSON-LD only. AI engines need Service blocks per offering (RAG implementation, fine-tuning, agent orchestration) with serviceType, provider, and offers if you disclose pricing. Adding the Service graph closes the gap against partner-directory listed agencies and is the lowest-effort highest-ROI fix in the audit.

Methodology →
mediumconf medium

AI Visibility pillar

Entity graph thin: 2 of 7 partner-directory sameAs links present

Your Organization JSON-LD includes sameAs to LinkedIn and GitHub but not to your Anthropic partner directory, OpenAI partner directory, Vertex AI partner directory, Hugging Face organization, or Crunchbase. AI engines triangulate AI-agency authority through this graph; the 2-of-7 ratio puts you in the bottom quartile vs the Anthropic-listed-partner cohort.

Methodology →

Glossary preview

Five terms every AI agencie should be able to define.

Full glossary →

Glossary

What is AI agency SEO?

The SEO practice for AI specialists and consultancies. Differs from generic technology-services SEO in three material ways: the buyers live in ChatGPT and Perplexity (so AI Visibility is the dominant pillar, not a bolt-on), render-parity is HIGH severity (most agency sites are SPAs invisible to AI crawlers), and the trust signal is methodology depth with primary-source citations (arXiv, schema.org spec, AI vendor docs).

Read the entry →

Glossary

Render-parity for AI crawlers

The share of a page's visible content that is already in the raw HTML an AI crawler fetches, compared with the DOM a browser builds after JavaScript runs. GPTBot, ClaudeBot, and PerplexityBot have been observed not executing JavaScript, so content rendered by React after hydration is invisible to them. Server rendering the marketing pages is the fix.

Read the entry →

Glossary

Service schema for AI agencies

A schema.org JSON-LD type for service offerings. For AI agencies, populate serviceType (specific: "Retrieval-Augmented Generation", "Model Fine-Tuning", "Agent Orchestration", "Prompt Engineering"), provider (Organization reference), areaServed, and offers if you publish pricing. Pair with Organization, Person (for principals), Article (for case studies and methodology posts), and the partner-directory sameAs entity graph.

Read the entry →

Glossary

Partner-directory entity graph for AI agencies

The set of sameAs links from your Organization JSON-LD to profiles that corroborate who you are: vendor partner directories you genuinely belong to (Google Cloud, AWS, Microsoft, model-provider programs), your GitHub and Hugging Face organizations, LinkedIn, and Crunchbase. Consistent, verifiable profiles are how AI engines confirm an AI agency is real before recommending it.

Read the entry →

Glossary

Who AI engines cite on AI agency queries

On "best AI agency for [use case]" questions, ChatGPT, Claude, and Perplexity lean on agency directories such as Clutch, vendor partner directories, published roundups, and a few well-known consultancies. Independent agencies break into the cited set with full render parity, Service and Article markup, a corroborated entity graph, and specific, citation-anchored case studies. The mix varies by engine, so the AI visibility check samples it on questions about your business.

Read the entry →

Compliance + trust note

AI services is not regulated YMYL. There are no mandatory disclosure footers. The trust signal in this vertical is methodology depth: every score on your site, every claim you make about model performance, should carry a primary-source citation (arXiv paper, schema.org spec, AI vendor documentation). The audit runs no legal or compliance checks; the credibility points (no unsourced benchmark, a primary source behind every method claim) are guidance and review prompts.

Today the compliance points on this page are vertical-tailored guidance and review prompts for you and your compliance reviewer. The audit does not run them as automated checks, and nothing in the report is a compliance verdict.

Five questions we hear most from AI agencies

FAQ.

Why does my AI agency site rank well on Google but get zero ChatGPT citations?

Almost always render-parity. Google's Googlebot renders JavaScript; GPTBot, ClaudeBot, and PerplexityBot do not. If your site is a SPA, AI crawlers see an empty container while Google sees the full page. The audit flags every page where the diff exceeds 30 percent and recommends a Server Components or static-export fix.

Is "render-parity" really HIGH severity for AI agencies and not for other verticals?

Yes. The severity override is configured in the ai_agencies adapter (and shipped in the registry). For other verticals (MCA, lawyers, doctors), render-parity is HIGH on critical pages and MEDIUM on others. For AI agencies, the entire value prop depends on being citable by the engines your buyers use, so the bar is HIGH on every page.

Can the audit handle my custom Next.js / Astro / Vite setup?

Yes. The audit fetches your raw HTML with the lightweight crawler and then runs a JS render via Playwright on Vercel Sandbox. The render-parity diff works on any setup. The fix recommendation is tailored to the framework detected (Server Components for Next.js App Router, static export for Vite, .astro page for Astro).

Does the audit polling actually hit ChatGPT, Claude, and Perplexity in production?

Yes, through their APIs. The free AI visibility check asks Perplexity and ChatGPT; paid tracking asks ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Grok, and Google AI Overviews every week with live web search, and every answer is stored with its receipt. These are API samples, so the consumer apps can answer differently. The audit itself does not sample answers: it grades the readiness signals (schema completeness, render parity, entity graph, passage extractability), and those checks run on every audit.

How long does an AI agency audit take and what does it cost?

The free audit usually takes 2 to 3 minutes and reads 1 page, the one you enter. Paid plans add weekly AI answer tracking on six AI answer engines, from 25 tracked prompts on Starter to 150 on Agency, more pages per audit, history, and PDF reports, white-labeled on Pro and Agency.

Free. No login. Top three findings per pillar visible inline. The full report (typically 45 to 70 findings, vertical-tailored, with evidence and fix per finding) is emailed when you drop an address. AI agencies get the audit pre-set to your vertical.