Check your company's AI visibility
Free, no credit card required.
Start with the customer's question
Choose intents linked to your offering and audience decisions: selecting a solution, comparisons, limitations or implementation. Assign each prompt a decision stage, product and audience. A competitor appearing more often does not explain what the user needs. Monitoring data is not an estimate of search volume or potential customer numbers either. Confirm the topic's relevance using sales conversations, customer support questions or your own search data.
Confirm the gap in a fixed sample
Review complete answers in several series using the same prompts, language and AI environment. Separate missing mentions, recommendations and citations of your domain. Flag questions where AI did not answer or no overview appeared. Look for a recurring absence of specific information rather than a single omission of the brand. Changing the question set halfway through can create an apparent improvement or gap.
AI monitoring budget: choosing questions, systems and review frequency
Open the competitor's cited sources
Identify which passages meet the user's need and whether the cited URL actually supports the claim. A competitor may be mentioned based on a comparison, product page or independent roundup. The absence of your own guide does not automatically explain its advantage. Record the source format, addressed intent and evidence your company can honestly provide. Do not copy a competitor's structure without adding your own value.
AI citation audit: do sources really support information about your company?
Decide: update, new URL or different work
Compare the intent with your blog, knowledge base and product or service pages. If an existing asset answers the same main question for the same audience, add the missing answer or evidence. A new URL makes sense for a distinct user decision with a standalone scope. If the problem is an incorrect business address, outdated pricing or an unreliable external source, fix the data or source first. Another article cannot solve every type of gap.
Blog and knowledge base without cannibalisation: how to divide topics for SEO and AI
AI gap: choose the right action. Check facts, existing URLs and distinct intent in that order. Editorial framework. A new URL needs a separate intent.
Prioritise and prepare a brief
Assess fit with the offering, recurrence of the gap, customer value, availability of original evidence and production cost. Document the rationale rather than treating an arbitrary score as a visibility forecast. The brief should include one main question, audience, excluded scope, target URL, required sources, reviewing expert and links to existing content. Plan a concise answer, conditions, example and limitations so the asset remains useful outside the conversation.
An example without cannibalisation
Hypothetical example: questions about agency tools reveal a missing explanation of managing multiple clients. An existing article covers monthly reporting. A piece about project organisation, prompt versioning and action ownership serves a separate intent; it should link to reporting rather than duplicate the report template. If a project management guide already exists, updating it may be the right choice. Decide from the full content, not title similarity.
Measure after implementation and FAQ
Save a baseline answer series before the change, then repeat the same set under comparable conditions after implementation. Record the change date, other activities and sample counts. An improvement after publication is not proof of causation. Does Semly provide a finished editorial plan? Prompts, competitors and sources can support decisions; coverage depends on configuration, and choosing a URL requires editorial judgement. Is every AI suggestion publishable? Check facts, existing coverage and audience value.
Did updating your article improve AI visibility? How to plan a before-and-after test
Sources and methodology
Share:
