We developed an AI search readiness audit framework after clients kept asking “why aren’t we appearing in ChatGPT?”
Our audit framework:
| Category | Weight | Areas Checked |
|---|---|---|
| Content Structure | 30% | Q&A format, answers, hierarchy |
| Technical Foundation | 25% | Schema, crawlers, performance |
| Authority Signals | 25% | E-E-A-T, citations, credentials |
| Current Visibility | 20% | Citations, competitive, coverage |
Recent client audit findings:
| Issue | Severity | % of Sites |
|---|---|---|
| Missing FAQ schema | High | 78% |
| Poor answer structure | High | 65% |
| Weak E-E-A-T signals | High | 58% |
| AI crawlers blocked | Critical | 42% |
| JS-dependent content | Medium | 35% |
| No AI visibility tracking | Medium | 89% |
The most common “why we’re invisible to AI” answer:
Poor content structure + missing schema. The content exists, but AI can’t extract it cleanly.
Questions:
Sharing to get feedback and improve our process.
Great framework. Let me add our detailed checklist for each category:
Content Structure Audit (30%):
Technical Foundation Audit (25%):
Authority Signals Audit (25%):
Current Visibility Audit (20%):
Adding the content extraction test - this is critical and often missed:
The AI Extraction Test:
What we check:
| Test | Pass Criteria | Common Failures |
|---|---|---|
| Direct question | AI cites your content | Answer buried in paragraphs |
| Answer accuracy | AI extracts correct info | Complex language confuses |
| Brand mention | Your brand is named | Generic citations only |
| Link inclusion | Link to your site appears | No actionable citation |
Example from recent audit:
Client content: 2000-word guide on topic AI query: “How do I [topic]?” Result: AI cited competitor with 500-word focused article
The insight:
Long, comprehensive content loses to focused, extractable content.
We now audit for “extraction density” - how much citable content per 100 words.
Technical audit deep dive - the issues that block AI visibility:
Critical blockers (fix immediately):
| Issue | Detection Method | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| AI crawlers blocked | Check robots.txt | Zero AI visibility |
| WAF blocking bots | Check firewall logs | Zero AI visibility |
| noindex on key pages | Site crawl | Pages invisible |
| JavaScript-only content | View source vs rendered | Content not extracted |
High priority (fix soon):
| Issue | Detection Method | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Missing FAQ schema | Schema validator | -40% citation likelihood |
| No Article schema | Schema validator | Harder classification |
| Slow page load | PageSpeed Insights | Lower crawl priority |
| Mobile issues | Mobile-friendly test | Reduced visibility |
Our technical audit process:
Tools we use:
E-E-A-T audit is often the weakest area. Here’s what to check:
Experience signals:
Expertise signals:
Authoritativeness signals:
Trustworthiness signals:
The E-E-A-T scoring:
| Signal Category | Score (1-5) | Priority to Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Experience | __ | Low = High priority |
| Expertise | __ | Low = High priority |
| Authoritativeness | __ | Low = Medium priority |
| Trustworthiness | __ | Low = High priority |
Weak E-E-A-T = AI systems don’t trust your content enough to cite.
Current visibility audit - establishing baselines is crucial:
What to measure:
| Metric | Tool | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|
| AI citations | Am I Cited | Current visibility baseline |
| Citation sentiment | Manual review | How you’re represented |
| Competitor citations | Am I Cited | Share of voice |
| Platform coverage | Manual testing | Which AI you’re in |
| Query coverage | Manual testing | Which queries cite you |
Our visibility audit process:
The visibility scorecard:
| Query | ChatGPT | Perplexity | Google AI | Priority |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Query 1 | Yes (2) | No | Yes (1) | High |
| Query 2 | No | Yes (3) | No | High |
| Query 3 | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (2) | Maintain |
Insight from audits:
Visibility varies dramatically by platform. You might dominate ChatGPT but be invisible on Perplexity.
Audit all platforms, optimize for gaps.
After the audit, prioritization determines ROI.
Our prioritization framework:
| Issue | Impact | Effort | Priority Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| High impact, low effort | 10 | 2 | 8 (Do first) |
| High impact, high effort | 10 | 8 | 2 (Plan carefully) |
| Low impact, low effort | 3 | 2 | 1 (Quick wins) |
| Low impact, high effort | 3 | 8 | -5 (Skip) |
Priority score = Impact - Effort
Typical priority order:
Our 30-day post-audit plan:
Expected results timeline:
Tools for AI readiness audits:
Free tools:
| Tool | Purpose | Limitation |
|---|---|---|
| Google Rich Results Test | Schema validation | Single page |
| PageSpeed Insights | Performance | No AI-specific |
| Mobile-Friendly Test | Mobile check | Basic only |
| View Source | JS rendering check | Manual |
Paid tools:
| Tool | Purpose | Best For |
|---|---|---|
| Am I Cited | AI visibility tracking | Citation monitoring |
| Screaming Frog | Site crawling | Technical audit |
| Ahrefs/SEMrush | Authority analysis | Backlink audit |
| Schema App | Schema management | Large sites |
Our audit tech stack:
DIY vs agency:
| Audit Scope | DIY | Agency |
|---|---|---|
| <50 pages | Yes | Overkill |
| 50-500 pages | Maybe | Recommended |
| 500+ pages | No | Required |
For large sites, manual auditing doesn’t scale.
Adding our audit report template:
Executive Summary:
Findings by Category:
For each of 4 categories:
Priority Action Plan:
| Week | Action | Expected Impact |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | [specific] | [specific] |
| 2 | [specific] | [specific] |
Tracking Plan:
Appendix:
This format helps clients understand and act on findings.
Real audit results and outcomes:
Client A (B2B SaaS):
Pre-audit visibility: 8 AI citations/month Issues found: 47 (12 critical) Implementation time: 6 weeks Post-audit visibility: 34 AI citations/month Improvement: 325%
Client B (E-commerce):
Pre-audit visibility: 3 product citations/month Issues found: 62 (18 critical) Implementation time: 8 weeks Post-audit visibility: 28 product citations/month Improvement: 833%
Client C (Professional Services):
Pre-audit visibility: 15 AI citations/month Issues found: 23 (5 critical) Implementation time: 4 weeks Post-audit visibility: 42 AI citations/month Improvement: 180%
Pattern:
Sites with more issues = more improvement potential Critical issues (crawlers, schema) = biggest impact when fixed E-E-A-T improvements take longest to impact visibility
ROI calculation:
Audit cost: $5-15K Implementation: $10-30K Visibility improvement: 200-800% Payback: 3-6 months typically
This discussion has helped refine our audit framework. Updated checklist:
AI Readiness Audit Checklist v2:
1. Technical Foundation (Critical)
2. Content Structure (High Priority)
3. Authority Signals (High Priority)
4. Visibility Baseline (Required)
Scoring:
Priority matrix:
Impact (1-10) - Effort (1-10) = Priority Score
Thanks everyone for the detailed additions. This thread is now a complete audit resource.
Get personalized help from our team. We'll respond within 24 hours.
Monitor how your audit improvements impact AI visibility. Track citations before and after optimization across all AI platforms.
Community discussion on recovering from poor AI visibility. Real experiences from brands that went from invisible to visible in ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google ...
Community discussion on fixing low AI visibility scores. Real experiences from marketers on diagnosing and improving AI search presence quickly.
Community discussion on how conversational queries differ from traditional keyword optimization for AI search. Real strategies from marketers adapting to AI-fir...
Cookie Consent
We use cookies to enhance your browsing experience and analyze our traffic. See our privacy policy.
