GEO Audit: Citely’s AI-visibility methodology — not a Google ranking factor
Citely scores some on-site signals that can affect how AI systems read and cite a page. Those scores are Citely heuristics. Google Search does not publish a “GEO score” and does not use llms.txt for ranking.
The problem: unverified “optimize for AI” checklists
Many GEO lists mix Search Central guidance with chunking tricks, special files, or rich-result promises. Teams cannot tell what Google said from what a vendor invented.
Citely keeps three layers separate
1) Official Google guidance (helpful content, truthful schema). 2) Citely’s operating methodology (answer structure, citations). 3) Proprietary UI scores. This landing describes layers 2 and 3. The no-login teaser is /audit.
How an audit runs
01
Try the public teaser on /audit
Paste a domain, get a teaser. No account. That is not the full workspace GEO audit.
02
Full audit in the workspace
Sign in to run GEO audit on a site attached to the tenant — the customer’s credentials, not Citely’s Search Console.
03
Read scores as heuristics
Answer Readiness, GEO score, and llms.txt presence (if any) are Citely indicators. They are not presented as Google ranking factors.
04
Fix content, do not hunt magic files
The work remains clear writing, sources, and schema that matches the page. Optional llms.txt only helps other AI crawlers read a site map — Google has said it does not use that file for ranking.
What GEO Audit does
- Public teaser at /audit.
- Workspace audit on the tenant’s site.
- Schema / crawler-file hints as interoperability signals, not ranking hacks.
- No Google position predictions, no “Google 2026 prefers this”.
Honest limits
No Google internal API. GEO / Answer Readiness scores are Citely heuristics. llms.txt is optional and not a ranking signal. The /audit teaser is not the full workspace audit.
Product evidence
The teaser tool is live at /audit on citely-seo.com. Use it to see what Citely returns — not a mocked screenshot.