AI Visibility Evidence Checklist

A business described under several slightly different names is harder for anyone to match to a single organisation.

If the offer has to be inferred from marketing language, a reader has to do the inferring.

Buyers frequently ask about a place. If coverage is not stated anywhere, it cannot be read from the site.

Accuracy matters in its own right, and an out-of-date claim is a liability regardless of who finds it.

They are the facts that distinguish one similarly named business from another.

Knowing where two sources disagree about the same business is the point of this check.

A single generic page covering everything leaves specific questions unanswered.

If a common question has no answer on the site, there is nothing to find.

It is usually the page a reader checks when deciding whether an organisation is what they think it is.

An unsupported claim is worth identifying whether or not anything else reads it.

Information that exists only as pixels cannot be read as text by anything, including screen readers.

Two pages saying different things about the same service is a finding in itself.

It is a standard way to state facts in a machine-readable form. Present or absent is a checkable condition; what any consumer does with it is not.

Structured data that disagrees with the page it sits on is a defect regardless of who reads it.

Same reasoning as stating them visibly: they distinguish one business from another.

Invalid markup may be discarded by the tools that read it, so an error is worth knowing about.

Knowing what your own robots.txt says is worth five minutes. It is a technical condition, not a visibility outcome.

A page blocked or canonicalised elsewhere by accident is a common and invisible mistake.

Profiles created years ago and never revisited are a common source of stale facts.

Where sources disagree, the disagreement itself is the finding.

An incorrect register entry is worth fixing on its own merits.

Old profiles for closed offices or former trading names persist for years.

A claim that cannot be checked anywhere is a claim resting on assertion alone.

Without a defined set there is nothing to measure consistently, and nothing to repeat later.

Answers vary between runs. A single run cannot separate a real pattern from ordinary variation.

The answers are the evidence. A number cannot be checked; the text can, and without a date and a named assistant one measurement cannot be compared with another.

What an answer pointed at is a separate fact from whether the business was named.

Appearing in an answer is not the same as being put forward. Collapsing them overstates the result.

Without a before, there is no after to compare it with.

Changing the question changes the instrument, and any difference might be the question rather than the business.

Without the log, a later difference has no account of what was done in the meantime.