This skill aggregates outputs from all GEO audit skills into a single, professional report that can be delivered directly to a client or stakeholder. The report is written for business owners and marketing leaders, not developers — technical findings are translated into business impact and clear action items with priority levels.
geo-platform-optimizer -> GEO-PLATFORM-OPTIMIZATION.mdgeo-schema -> GEO-SCHEMA-REPORT.mdgeo-technical -> GEO-TECHNICAL-AUDIT.mdgeo-content -> GEO-CONTENT-ANALYSIS.mdgeo-llms-txt -> llms.txt assessmentgeo-brand-mentions -> brand authority data| Component | Weight | Source Skill |
|---|---|---|
| AI Platform Readiness | 25% | geo-platform-optimizer |
| Content Quality & E-E-A-T | 25% | geo-content |
| Technical Foundation | 20% | geo-technical |
| Schema & Structured Data | 15% | geo-schema |
| Brand Authority & Entity Presence | 15% | geo-platform-optimizer (entity signals) |
GEO Score = (Platform Score * 0.25) + (Content Score * 0.25) + (Technical Score * 0.20) + (Schema Score * 0.15) + (Brand Score * 0.15)
Round to the nearest integer. Cap at 100.
| Score Range | Label | Client-Facing Description |
|---|---|---|
| 85-100 | Excellent | Your site is well-positioned for AI search. Focus on maintaining and expanding your advantage. |
| 70-84 | Good | Solid foundation with clear opportunities to improve AI visibility. Targeted optimizations will yield significant results. |
| 55-69 | Moderate | Your site has gaps in AI readiness that competitors may be exploiting. A structured optimization plan will close these gaps. |
| 40-54 | Below Average | Significant barriers to AI search visibility exist. Without action, your brand risks being invisible in AI-generated answers. |
| 0-39 | Needs Attention | Critical AI readiness issues require immediate action. Your competitors are likely capturing the AI search traffic your brand should own. |
The complete report follows this exact structure. Each section includes instructions on what to write and how.
Write exactly ONE paragraph (4-6 sentences) covering:
Tone: Confident, direct, professional. No jargon. No hedging. Write as a consultant delivering findings, not as a tool generating a report.
Present the overall score prominently:
## GEO Readiness Score: XX/100 — [Label]
Then break down by component in a table:
| Component | Score | Weight | Weighted Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| AI Platform Readiness | XX/100 | 25% | XX |
| Content Quality & E-E-A-T | XX/100 | 25% | XX |
| Technical Foundation | XX/100 | 20% | XX |
| Schema & Structured Data | XX/100 | 15% | XX |
| Brand Authority | XX/100 | 15% | XX |
| **Overall** | | | **XX/100** |
Present per-platform readiness scores:
## AI Visibility Dashboard
| AI Platform | Readiness Score | Key Gap | Priority Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| Google AI Overviews | XX/100 | [One-line gap] | [One-line action] |
| ChatGPT Web Search | XX/100 | [One-line gap] | [One-line action] |
| Perplexity AI | XX/100 | [One-line gap] | [One-line action] |
| Google Gemini | XX/100 | [One-line gap] | [One-line action] |
| Bing Copilot | XX/100 | [One-line gap] | [One-line action] |
Add a brief paragraph explaining what these scores mean: "These scores reflect how likely your content is to be cited by each AI search platform. A score below 50 indicates significant barriers to citation on that platform."
Present as a clear table:
## AI Crawler Access
| AI Crawler | Platform | Status | Impact | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Googlebot | Google Search + AIO | Allowed/Blocked | Critical | [Action] |
| GPTBot | ChatGPT / OpenAI | Allowed/Blocked | High | [Action] |
| Bingbot | Bing + Copilot + ChatGPT | Allowed/Blocked | High | [Action] |
| PerplexityBot | Perplexity AI | Allowed/Blocked | Medium | [Action] |
| Google-Extended | Gemini Training | Allowed/Blocked | Medium | [Action] |
| ClaudeBot | Anthropic Claude | Allowed/Blocked | Medium | [Action] |
| Applebot-Extended | Apple Intelligence | Allowed/Blocked | Medium | [Action] |
Translate for the client: "Blocking AI crawlers is like closing your store during business hours. If a crawler cannot access your site, the AI platform it powers cannot cite your content. We recommend allowing all major AI crawlers unless you have a specific data licensing concern."
Present entity presence across platforms:
## Brand Authority
| Platform | Presence | Status | Impact on AI Visibility |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wikipedia | Yes/No | [Detail] | Very High — 47.9% of ChatGPT citations are Wikipedia |
| Wikidata | Yes/No | [Detail] | High — machine-readable entity data |
| LinkedIn | Yes/No | [Detail] | High — Bing Copilot and ChatGPT signal |
| YouTube | Yes/No | [Detail] | High — Gemini and Perplexity signal |
| Reddit | Yes/No | [Detail] | Very High — 46.7% of Perplexity citations are Reddit |
| Google Knowledge Panel | Yes/No | [Detail] | High — Gemini entity recognition |
| Crunchbase | Yes/No | [Detail] | Medium — entity validation |
| GitHub | Yes/No | [Detail] | Medium — tech brand signal |
Translate for the client: "AI platforms build trust by cross-referencing your brand across multiple authoritative sources. Each platform where your brand has an accurate, consistent presence increases the likelihood of being cited in AI answers."
For each page:
For each page:
Business impact framing: "Your most citable pages are your best candidates for appearing in AI-generated answers. Improving the 5 least citable pages represents the highest-ROI content investment you can make for AI visibility."
Present the key technical findings in business-friendly language:
## Technical Health
| Area | Status | Business Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Core Web Vitals | Good/Needs Work/Poor | [Impact on user experience and rankings] |
| Server-Side Rendering | Yes/Partial/No | [Impact on AI crawler visibility] |
| Mobile Optimization | Good/Needs Work/Poor | [Impact on Google's mobile-first indexing] |
| Security (HTTPS + Headers) | Good/Needs Work/Poor | [Impact on trust signals] |
| Page Speed | Fast/Average/Slow | [Impact on user experience and crawl budget] |
| IndexNow Protocol | Implemented/Not | [Impact on Bing/ChatGPT indexing speed] |
Critical finding callout: If SSR is missing or partial, highlight this prominently: "Your site uses client-side rendering, which means AI crawlers see an empty page when they visit. This is the single most impactful technical issue for AI search visibility. Until this is resolved, most AI platforms cannot cite your content."
## Schema & Structured Data
### Current Implementation
| Schema Type | Present | Status | AI Impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Organization | Yes/No | [Valid/Issues] | Critical — entity recognition |
| Article + Author | Yes/No | [Valid/Issues] | High — E-E-A-T signal |
| sameAs (entity links) | Yes/No | [Count] links | Critical — cross-platform entity graph |
| [Business-specific] | Yes/No | [Valid/Issues] | [Impact] |
| WebSite + SearchAction | Yes/No | [Valid/Issues] | Medium — sitelinks |
| BreadcrumbList | Yes/No | [Valid/Issues] | Low-Medium — navigation context |
If schemas are missing, note: "Ready-to-use structured data code has been prepared and is included in the technical appendix. Your development team can add this to your site with minimal effort."
## llms.txt — AI Content Guide
| File | Status | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
| /llms.txt | Present/Missing | [Action] |
| /llms-full.txt | Present/Missing | [Action] |
Translate for the client: "llms.txt is an emerging standard (similar to robots.txt) that tells AI systems what your site is about and which pages are most important. While not universally adopted yet, implementing it positions your brand ahead of competitors and provides direct guidance to AI platforms."
This is the most important section of the report. Organize actions by timeline and impact.
## Prioritized Action Plan
### Quick Wins (This Week)
*High impact, low effort — can be implemented immediately*
| # | Action | Impact | Effort | Platforms Affected |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | [Specific action] | [High/Med] | [Hours estimate] | [Which AI platforms] |
| 2 | [Specific action] | [High/Med] | [Hours estimate] | [Which AI platforms] |
Quick Win criteria: Can be done in < 4 hours by one person. Examples:
### Medium-Term Improvements (This Month)
*Significant impact, moderate effort — requires content or technical changes*
| # | Action | Impact | Effort | Platforms Affected |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | [Specific action] | [High/Med] | [Days estimate] | [Which AI platforms] |
Medium-Term criteria: 1-5 days of work. Examples:
### Strategic Initiatives (This Quarter)
*Long-term competitive advantage, requires ongoing investment*
| # | Action | Impact | Effort | Platforms Affected |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | [Specific action] | [High/Med] | [Weeks estimate] | [Which AI platforms] |
Strategic criteria: Ongoing effort over weeks/months. Examples:
After the action plan, include an impact estimate:
"Based on industry benchmarks and the specific gaps identified in this audit:
Use conservative estimates. Base the dollar figure on:
If competitor URLs were analyzed alongside the primary domain:
## Competitor Comparison
| Metric | [Your Brand] | [Competitor 1] | [Competitor 2] |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall GEO Score | XX/100 | XX/100 | XX/100 |
| Google AIO Readiness | XX/100 | XX/100 | XX/100 |
| ChatGPT Readiness | XX/100 | XX/100 | XX/100 |
| Perplexity Readiness | XX/100 | XX/100 | XX/100 |
| Schema Coverage | [Detail] | [Detail] | [Detail] |
| Wikipedia Presence | Yes/No | Yes/No | Yes/No |
| Reddit Authority | [Detail] | [Detail] | [Detail] |
| SSR Status | Yes/No | Yes/No | Yes/No |
### Where You Lead
[Specific areas where the brand outperforms competitors]
### Where You Trail
[Specific areas where competitors have an advantage, with actions to close the gap]
## Appendix
### Methodology
This GEO audit was conducted using the following methodology:
- **Pages analyzed**: [List of specific URLs audited]
- **Platforms assessed**: Google AI Overviews, ChatGPT, Perplexity AI, Google Gemini, Bing Copilot
- **Technical checks**: HTTP headers, robots.txt, HTML source analysis, structured data validation
- **Content assessment**: E-E-A-T framework (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness) per Google's December 2025 Quality Rater Guidelines
- **Schema validation**: JSON-LD parsing and Schema.org specification compliance
- **Date of analysis**: [Date]
### Data Sources
- Google Search Quality Rater Guidelines (December 2025 update)
- Schema.org full type hierarchy
- Industry citation studies (Zyppy, Authoritas, Semrush AI search research, 2025-2026)
- Core Web Vitals thresholds (web.dev, 2026 standards)
- AI crawler user-agent documentation (per-platform official docs)
### Glossary
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| GEO | Generative Engine Optimization — optimizing content to be cited by AI search platforms |
| AIO | AI Overviews — Google's AI-generated answer boxes at the top of search results |
| E-E-A-T | Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness — Google's content quality framework |
| SSR | Server-Side Rendering — generating HTML on the server so crawlers can read content without JavaScript |
| CWV | Core Web Vitals — Google's page experience metrics (LCP, INP, CLS) |
| LCP | Largest Contentful Paint — time to render the largest visible element |
| INP | Interaction to Next Paint — responsiveness metric (replaced FID in March 2024) |
| CLS | Cumulative Layout Shift — visual stability metric |
| JSON-LD | JavaScript Object Notation for Linked Data — preferred structured data format |
| sameAs | Schema.org property linking an entity to its profiles on other platforms |
| IndexNow | Protocol for instantly notifying search engines of content changes |
| llms.txt | Proposed standard file for guiding AI systems about a site's content |
| YMYL | Your Money or Your Life — topics requiring highest E-E-A-T standards |
| SERP | Search Engine Results Page |
| Topical Authority | The depth and breadth of a site's coverage of its core topic area |
Where possible, connect recommendations to business value:
Be conservative with estimates. State assumptions clearly. Never guarantee specific results.
Generate GEO-CLIENT-REPORT.md using the complete template above, filled with actual audit data. The report should be: