Find out whether the answer engines mention you at all

What measuring it actually looks like

Here is the real output of one prompt, run on 6 September 2026, in my own market. I sell monitoring and auditing for n8n automations, so I asked the question my buyers would ask.

That is one finding out of six, and the other five were more useful. Two of the six questions triggered no web search at all — the model answered from memory, which means no content anyone writes could ever have been cited. And every single citation across all six went to a property owned by the platform itself: its forum, its documentation, its repository, its blog. Not one independent site.

None of that is guessable from the outside. It took an hour to find out, and it changed where I was about to spend a month.

What you get

A dated report, in 48 hours, containing what is actually true for your market rather than what is generally true about AI search.

• Twelve to twenty questions your buyers really ask, phrased the way they type them, taken from your market's own forums and issue trackers rather than a keyword tool.
• Which of them trigger a search at all. The finding nobody reports. A question answered from training has no retrieval step, so no content can win it, and knowing which of yours are like that tells you where not to spend.
• Who gets named, verbatim, with the sources cited. Including your competitors. This is usually the page people read first.
• Whether you appear. Stated plainly either way.
• Where the citations in your market actually come from — vendor sites, forums, documentation, news — which decides where effort is worth spending and is invisible without measuring.
• A recommendation, including "do nothing".
• The baseline, recorded and dated, so running it again in three months is a comparison rather than an impression.

When the answer is "don't bother"

Sometimes the honest finding is that this channel does not apply to you, and the report says so.

If your buyers' questions are the kind a model answers from memory, there is no retrieval step to be cited in, and nothing you publish will change that. If every citation in your market goes to a platform whose own documentation you are never going to outrank, that is worth knowing before you commission a year of content.

That outcome costs you 149 dollars instead of a budget. It is a real result, and it is the reason this is sold as a measurement rather than as an optimisation service.

What this is not

It is not an SEO retainer, a content package, or a promise that AI will start recommending you.

I cannot guarantee a citation and neither can anyone else. Whether an engine names you depends on what it retrieves at the moment somebody asks, which no supplier controls. Anyone selling that outcome is either guessing or hoping you will not check.

I have run this method once so far, on my own site, and I have not been cited anywhere yet. The most useful thing it told me was that four pages I had just published were on the wrong kind of domain to be quoted in my market at all. I published that finding rather than burying it, which is the only real evidence that the measurement is honest.

Who is doing this

I run a single-person practice doing reliability audits for automation systems — finding the things that report success while quietly doing nothing. This is the same work pointed at a different question: everyone assumes their AI visibility is fine because nobody has looked.

You work directly with me. There is no account manager, no sales process, and I answer my own email.