geociter.

Most AI engines never see your site.

AI crawlers execute zero JavaScript, so any content missing from your raw HTML is invisible to them. geociter reads your site the way AI crawlers do, runs 38 evidence-tagged checks in about a minute, then writes the fixes for you.

No signup needed for the score. Takes about a minute.

See a sample report
robots.txt, AI-bot policy Example output 
$

Why this happens

The research behind AEO/GEO is public. Most sites just aren't built for what it says.

0 JS instructions AI crawlers run before reading your page Vercel × MERJ, 500M+ fetches analyzed
6 of 6 AI models more likely to cite a recently dated page than an otherwise identical old one Vishwakarma et al., SIGIR 2026
19 of 24 tested settings where adding statistics lowered a page's citation rank C-SEO Bench, NeurIPS 2025
53% of the domains Google's AI Overviews consult are not in the top 10 search results Kirsten et al., arXiv 2510.11560

Keyword stuffing gave no gain in the Princeton study. geociter doesn't optimise for keywords, it optimises for being quotable.

38 evidence-tagged checks

Every check is grouped into one of four categories. Each one cites the research behind it, not a made-up score.

Category What it verifies Evidence
Crawler access Whether GPTBot, PerplexityBot, ClaudeBot, and Google-Extended get an unblocked, JavaScript-free path to your content. AI crawlers execute zero JavaScript, Vercel × MERJ, 500M+ fetches
Structured data Whether there's parseable JSON-LD an answer engine can lift without inferring it from prose. Weighted lower after an Ahrefs matched test of 1,885 pages found no citation lift from adding JSON-LD
Content shape Whether claims sit in 120–180-word sections, backed by direct quotations, statistics, or a cited source. Cited pages with statistics were used 62% more in answers, arXiv 2604.25707. Rewriting pages to add them did not move citation rank, C-SEO Bench
Retrievability Whether a RAG system could answer your page's own likely questions using only text already on the page. Topic match and list position were the largest citation effects in all six models tested, Vishwakarma et al., SIGIR 2026

The retrievability simulation

geociter treats your page as a small RAG corpus. For each question a person might ask an AI engine about what you do, it checks whether your page contains a single, self-contained passage that answers it, quotable, sourced, and short enough to lift whole.

Before, not retrievable

The answer is buried after three paragraphs of scene-setting. No source is named. The section runs 400+ words, so a citation engine would have to summarise it, and summarising means it might not pick you.

After, retrievable

The claim leads the section, a source is named inline, and the whole passage sits inside 120–180 words, the shape geociter's checks are built around.

Paste-ready fixes

Every failed check ships with the fix already written, not a to-do, a file.

  • llms.txt
  • robots.txt AI-bot policy
  • JSON-LD blocks
  • rewrite TODOs

Every check that fails carries the citation for why it's checked, and the exact block to paste to fix it.

schema.jsonld Example output 
{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "Article",
  "headline": "Replace with your page's H1",
  "datePublished": "2026-01-01",
  "author": {
    "@type": "Organization",
    "name": "Your organization"
  },
  "citation": "https://source-you-cited.example/study"
}

What geociter doesn't do (yet)

It audits your site and writes the fixes. It doesn't monitor whether ChatGPT, Perplexity, or Google's AI Overviews are actually citing you after you ship them, that's live citation tracking, and it isn't built yet.

Run the audit. See exactly what's blocking you.

Run a free audit See a sample report