AI Search Ignoring You? Run a GEO Audit to Find the Fixes

You publish content. You update pages. You even do the whole SEO checklist thing.

And yet when someone asks ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Copilot, whatever… about the exact problem you solve, your brand is basically invisible. Or worse, it name drops a competitor that’s clearly thinner than you.

If that’s happening, you probably do not have a “traffic” problem. You have a visibility inside AI answers problem.

That’s where a GEO audit comes in. GEO, as in generative engine optimization. Same core goal as SEO, sure, but the failure points are different. A page can rank fine and still get ignored by AI systems that summarize the web. And a page can rank nowhere and still get cited, because it’s structured and written in a way that makes it easy to pull into an answer.

So this post is basically the audit I would run if I had to diagnose why AI search is skipping your site. No theory dump. Just the practical checks, the fixes, and what to prioritize.

GEO audit vs SEO audit (not the same thing)

A traditional SEO audit asks:

• Can Google crawl and index this?
• Are we targeting keywords and matching intent?
• Do we have links, authority, technical health?

A GEO audit asks different questions, like:

• Is this page quotable?
• Does it include clear definitions and direct answers?
• Is the author/source trustworthy enough to cite?
• Can an AI system easily extract the “best” 2 to 6 lines?
• Does the page provide unique evidence, not just rewritten common knowledge?

This is why you can have a perfectly optimized post and still never show up in AI answers. Because AI systems are often selecting sources based on “can I safely and clearly use this” more than “does this rank #3 for the keyword”.

Not always. But enough that it matters.

Step 1: Confirm you are actually being ignored (quick tests)

Before you fix anything, verify the symptom. I like doing three tests:

1) The citation test

Ask an AI tool a question you should obviously win.

Example prompts:

• “What is the best way to run a GEO audit for a SaaS website? Cite sources.”
• “List 5 tools for hands off content marketing SEO. Include sources.”
• “What is [your product category] and what should I look for when buying? Provide references.”

If it cites sources but never yours, that’s a clear signal.

2) The brand mention test

Ask:

• “What is [Your Brand]?”
• “Is [Your Brand] legit? What does it do?”
• “Compare [Your Brand] vs [Competitor].”

If the model invents details, mixes you up, or only uses review sites, you likely have an entity and source coverage problem.

3) The “best page” test

Ask:

• “What page should I read to learn about [topic]?”
• “What is the most practical guide on [topic]?”

If it sends people to generic list posts or thin definitions, that’s a clue that your content is not being seen as the clearest source. Not necessarily the most “complete”, just the cleanest to use.

Write down what shows up instead of you. Those pages are your real competitors in GEO.

Step 2: Inventory the pages that should be cited

This part is boring, but it’s where audits become real.

Make a list of your “should win” pages:

• Product pages that explain what you do
• Core category pages (the ones that define the problem)
• Comparison pages (you vs alternatives)
• “How to” guides that map to high intent questions
• Original data pages (benchmarks, studies, templates, checklists)

If you don’t have those pages… well. That’s the audit result.

If you do have them, keep going.

Step 3: The GEO audit checklist (the stuff that actually moves the needle)

1) Does the page answer the question in the first 10 seconds?

AI systems love pages that get to the point.

Open your page and ask yourself: if I only read the first 150 to 250 words, do I know:

• what this is
• who it’s for
• when to use it
• the key steps or key takeaway

If your intro is a long warm up, you’re forcing both humans and machines to work harder than necessary.

Fix: add a “direct answer” block near the top.

Something like:

Quick answer: A GEO audit checks whether your content is structured and credible enough to be used inside AI generated answers. It focuses on extractable summaries, clear definitions, evidence, and entity trust signals more than keyword placement.

That one little block can change how “citable” the page feels.

2) Is the page written in quotable chunks?

This is the big one.

AI tools pull snippets that are:

• short
• complete
• specific
• not dependent on surrounding context

If your writing is one long flowing narrative, it may read nicely, but it’s harder to extract.

Fixes that work:

• Add definitions in single sentences.
• Use short subheadings that match questions people ask.
• Use lists that are actually meaningful, not fluff.
• Add mini frameworks: “3 signals”, “5 steps”, “2 mistakes”.

Basically, give the model handles to grab.

3) Do you have original signals, or are you just summarizing the internet?

If your article is “what is GEO” and it’s just rephrased definitions, you’re interchangeable.

Interchangeable pages do not get cited much. They’re everywhere.

Fix: add something that can only come from you:

• a process you actually use
• screenshots of real audits
• example before and after snippets
• templates
• a scoring rubric
• actual numbers (even small ones)

Even a simple table like this can help:

Not fancy. Just real.

4) Entity clarity: can AI tell who you are and what you do?

A weird amount of GEO issues come down to this.

Your site might be missing clear, repeated statements like:

• “SEO Software is an AI powered SEO automation platform…”
• “It generates and publishes SEO optimized articles automatically…”
• “It integrates with WordPress, Shopify, Webflow…”

If that language is inconsistent across pages, or buried, you’re harder to model.

Fix:

• Put a consistent, plain description of your brand in key places: homepage, about, product page, footer, and relevant blog posts.
• Use the same name format everywhere (no switching between “SEOsoftware”, “SEO Software AI”, “SEO.Software”, etc).
• Add a short “What we do” section on informational posts where relevant.

If you want a reference point for what a structured audit looks like, there’s a solid resource here on content audit workflows. It’s SEO focused, but the same inventory mindset applies to GEO too: run a content audit.

5) Missing comparison and alternatives content (quiet killer)

AI answers love comparison framing.

If you never explicitly write:

• alternatives
• pros/cons
• when not to use something
• “X vs Y” then you leave the door open for someone else to define the category.

Fix: build a few pages that you might have avoided because they feel “too salesy”, but keep them honest and useful:

• “[Your product] vs hiring an agency”
• “[Your product] vs doing it manually”
• “Best workflows for hands off content marketing”
• “When AI content fails and how to prevent it”

Be direct. Models like direct.

6) Internal linking that creates topical neighborhoods

In GEO, internal links still matter, but more for meaning and clustering than raw PageRank vibes.

If your “GEO audit” post is isolated, it’s less likely to be seen as part of an authority cluster. Link it to:

• AI writing guidance
• editing workflows
• content audit pages
• your product workflows

For example, if you’re editing and refining drafts, an AI assisted editor that enforces on page clarity is part of the GEO fix, not a separate thing. Something like an AI SEO editor can help tighten intros, add missing sections, and keep tone consistent across pages. Relevant here: AI SEO editor.

Also, if you want to go deeper on tool choices and tradeoffs, this guide on AI writing tools is a good hub to link out to (and yes, hubs help).

7) “Trust” signals that AI systems actually pick up

This can get hand wavy, so let’s keep it practical.

Check if your page includes:

• author name (not “admin”)
• author bio that matches the topic
• date updated (and actually updated content)
• references or external citations when you make claims
• clear contact/about info somewhere on the site

If your content is anonymous and claim heavy, it’s harder to cite.

Fix: add a short author box, add “last updated”, cite a couple primary sources when relevant. Not 40 citations. Just enough to show you’re not guessing.

8) Structured data and technical basics (yes, still matters)

I’m not going to pretend schema solves GEO. It doesn’t.

But if your site is messy, slow, blocked, or your pages are hard to parse, you’re making it worse.

At minimum:

• Make sure pages are indexable.
• Ensure canonical tags are correct.
• Avoid duplicating the same article across tags/categories.
• Keep headings clean (one H1, logical H2s).
• Don’t hide the main content behind weird scripts.

Also, if your page is loaded with popups and interstitials that block reading, that’s not just a UX issue. It can reduce extractability.

Step 4: Build a simple GEO score (so you know what to fix first)

You do not need a complicated framework. You just need a way to prioritize.

Here’s a simple scoring model I use. Rate each page 0 to 2:

1. Direct answer present near top
2. Quotable structure (definitions, lists, steps)
3. Original value (examples, templates, data)
4. Entity clarity (who you are, what you do)
5. Trust signals (author, update date, citations)
6. Internal links (to relevant cluster pages)
7. Comparisons and “when not to” content
8. Technical cleanliness (indexable, readable)

Max score: 16.

Anything under 9 is usually a rewrite, not a tweak.

Anything 9 to 12 is “good but not sticky”. Add examples, tighten summaries, improve chunking.

Anything 13+ is where you start seeing citations, assuming the topic has demand and your site is crawlable.

Step 5: Common GEO failures I see on SaaS sites (and the fixes)

Failure: “We explain it, but we don’t state it”

SaaS writing often implies what the product does instead of saying it cleanly. AI prefers clean statements.

Fix: add explicit “X is Y” sentences.

Failure: The blog is informational, product pages are vague

So you rank for educational queries, but AI can’t confidently cite your product as the solution.

Fix: make product pages more specific. Add use cases, workflows, limits, integrations, and “what happens after you connect your site”.

Failure: Content is long but not structured

Length is not authority. Structure is authority, at least in how models can use it.

Fix: rewrite for chunking. Use headings that match questions.

Failure: No real examples

If you don’t show the work, you don’t get the credit.

Fix: add 2 to 3 real examples per key guide.

Step 6: The fastest path to “AI visibility” for most teams

If you want the shortest plan that actually works, it’s this:

1. Pick 5 pages that should get cited.
2. Add a direct answer block to each.
3. Add a “steps” section with clear headings.
4. Add 2 real examples or mini case snippets.
5. Add internal links between the cluster pages.
6. Update the date and add author info.
7. Create 2 comparison pages that match buying intent.

Do that before you publish 40 more generic blog posts.

Where SEO Software fits in (and why it matters for GEO)

Here’s the thing. A lot of GEO fixes are content operations problems, not just writing problems.

You need to:

• keep topics organized
• keep articles updated
• maintain internal links
• publish consistently without burning out

That’s the exact scenario where an automation platform can help, especially if you’re trying to scale content without hiring an agency.

SEO Software is built for hands off content marketing. It scans your site, builds a keyword and topic strategy, generates SEO optimized articles, and schedules and publishes them for you. It also handles things like internal linking, rewrites, multilingual content, and CMS integrations.

If your GEO audit shows you’re missing entire clusters, or you have weak coverage around your core category, that kind of system can close the gap faster than doing it manually.

If you’re curious, start with their audit workflow here: content audit. And if your issue is more “the content exists but it’s not tight enough”, the AI SEO editor is a relevant next stop.

A quick mini template: GEO audit notes you can copy

Use this on each page you review:

Page:
Target question:
Current performance: (rankings, traffic, conversions if you have it)

GEO issues found:

• No direct answer near top
• Intro too vague
• No definitions
• Not chunked into steps
• No examples or evidence
• Missing “when to use” and “when not to”
• Weak brand/entity mention
• No author or update date
• No internal links to cluster pages

Fix plan (in order):

1. Add quick answer block
2. Add step by step section
3. Add examples
4. Add comparison or alternatives section
5. Add internal links
6. Add trust signals

Outcome to watch: citations, brand mentions, referral clicks from AI surfaces

Wrap up

If AI search is ignoring you, it’s usually not because you’re “not doing SEO”.

It’s because your pages are not built to be reused inside answers. Not enough clarity. Not enough structure. Not enough proof. And sometimes, not enough consistency in what your brand even is.

Run the GEO audit like a checklist, score your pages, fix the obvious stuff first. Then scale what works.

And if you want to speed up the content side of all this, without turning your team into a publishing factory that never sleeps, take a look at SEO Software. It’s basically built for the “we need consistent content growth, but we also need our lives back” problem.