u/rworldxo

i’m trying to stop treating every missed ai prompt like it has the same value.

we had hundreds of missed prompts, and my first reaction was basically:

“ok we need to fix all of this”

but that gets messy fast.

so now i’m grouping missed prompts into buckets:

1. high intent comparison example: “best x for startups”, “x vs y”, “alternatives to y”
2. use-case prompts example: “tool for doing x”, “how to solve y”
3. proof/source gaps ai trusts reddit, listicles, review sites, partner pages, docs, etc. more than our own site
4. bad-fit/noise prompts stuff we probably should not care about yet

then for each bucket i ask:

do we already have a page for this?
does the page answer the prompt directly?
who is ai citing instead?
is the fix on-site content or third-party proof?
is this worth fixing this week?

the main change for me is not “track more prompts.”

it’s turning missed prompts into a small weekly action list.

right now my rule is: pick 3 fixes per week, ship them, then re-check the same prompts later.

are you fixing by volume, intent, competitor gap, or citation/source gap?

i know 1% sounds tiny lol.

but for us it felt like a real build in public moment.

we’re building infuseos in a market where some competitors have funding, bigger teams, and way more marketing budget.

we don’t have that.

so we started using our own product like we were the customer.

at first, ai tools were basically not recommending us at all. 0%.

competitors were showing up. other sources were getting trusted. we were just invisible.

so we used infuseos to:

track buyer prompts
see which competitors ai recommended
check what sources ai trusted
connect gsc data
find pages we were missing
create/update content in sanity
then re-check if anything moved

after doing this for the last week, we moved from 0% to almost 1% visibility.

again, not some massive win.

but it proved something to us:

tracking is not enough. the useful part is knowing what to fix next.

that’s what we’re trying to build now. not another dashboard, more like a weekly action list for ai visibility.

i’m running a few free ai visibility reports.

basically checking what happens when someone asks chatgpt, gemini, perplexity, etc. for companies/tools in your category.

drop:

your website
what you do

i’ll run a few buyer-style prompts and send back:

do you show up
who shows up instead
what sources/pages ai seems to trust
what i’d fix first

not a full seo audit or anything. just a quick report so you can see where you stand.

i’m building infuseos around this workflow, so also using it to learn what people actually care about.

i’ll do the first 10 manually.

i’ve been trying to make aeo/geo less random.

my old way was basically:

think of topics
write articles
hope ai/search picks them up

now i’m doing it more like this inside infuseos:

connect google search console
connect sanity
ask the agent to find pages/queries with impressions but weak clicks
turn those into buyer-style article ideas
write the draft
map it to my sanity schema
create/update the sanity draft
then validate before publishing

the prompt is usually something like:

“use my search console data to find one query cluster with high impressions / low ctr or position 8-20. turn it into a helpful article for a buyer, include seo title, meta description, slug, faqs, direct answer, and internal link ideas. then create it as a sanity draft.”

the part i like is sanity is not just “paste markdown somewhere.”

the agent checks the live sanity schema first, maps the right fields, handles seo fields separately if the schema has them, and validates the draft before it goes live.

then i can turn the same thing into a weekly automation:

every week:
find new gsc opportunities
pick the best content gap
create a sanity draft
tell me what changed / what got created

not saying this is some huge win yet, but we went from basically 0% ai visibility to almost 1% lol.

small number, but at least the workflow is moving something.

i keep seeing ai visibility tools that show stuff like:

“you showed up here”
“competitor showed up there”
“these sources were cited”

cool, but then what?

if a competitor shows up in chatgpt/perplexity and you don’t, i want to know:

why them?
what source did ai trust?
what page are we missing?
what should we fix first?

that’s basically what i’m trying to build with infuseos.

less “dashboard”, more “tell me what to fix next.”

does that make sense as positioning or still sound too vague?

https://preview.redd.it/ds1ng2s0us8h1.png?width=2940&format=png&auto=webp&s=18f3e33794d24c798874da08979e49ce083feb0a

im seeing more companies ask one thing now:

when someone asks chatgpt, gemini, or perplexity for tools in our space, do we show up or does a competitor?

most tools can track that.

but tracking alone feels incomplete to me.

if a competitor shows up and you don’t, the real question is:

why them?
what source did ai trust?
what page are we missing?
what should we fix this week?

that’s what i’m trying to build with infuseos.

not just “you rank here / competitor ranks there” but more like “here’s why you’re missing and what to fix next.”

is that positioning clear, or does it still sound like another vague ai marketing tool?

seeing more teams check if platforms mention them or their competitors.

tracking is easy part.

what i’m trying to understand is the actual marketing workflow after that.

if competitor shows up and you don’t, what would you fix first?

comparison pages?

third-party mentions?

docs/content?

product pages?

using gsc/search queries as prompts?

for anyone doing this in-house or for clients, what’s the simple process after the report?

companies are starting to care about whether ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, etc. recommend them or their competitors.

Most tools in this space seem to stop at tracking:

you appeared here
competitor appeared there
these sources were cited

That’s useful, but it still leaves the main question:

what do we fix?

InfuseOS is trying to connect AI visibility to actual actions:

which prompts matter
why competitors show up
which sources AI trusts
what pages/sources are missing
what to do this week

Roast the positioning.

Is “AI visibility + what to fix next” clear, or does it sound like another vague AI marketing tool?

Hey everyone! I'm u/rworldxo, a founding moderator of r/AEOWorkflows.

This is our new home for everything around AEO, GEO, AI visibility, prompt tracking, citations, authority signals, and the actual workflows people are using to help brands show up in AI answers.

We created this community for SEOs, marketers, agency owners, founders, builders, and anyone trying to understand how brands appear across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI answers, and other AI search / answer engines.

What to Post

Post anything you think the community would find helpful, interesting, or useful.

Feel free to share:

• AEO/GEO questions
• AI visibility experiments
• prompt tracking ideas
• citation or source examples
• authority signal discussions
• content or page fixes
• client reporting workflows
• how you’re using automations with GSC, GA, Google Ads, ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, etc.
• workflows you’ve built for finding gaps, creating prompts, or turning data into actions
• tool comparisons
• case studies, wins, or failures
• things you tested that did or didn’t work

Community Vibe

We want this to be a friendly, practical, and honest space.

AEO/GEO is still early, and nobody has the full playbook fully figured out yet. So the goal here is simple: share what works, talk about what doesn’t, ask good questions, and help each other build better workflows.

Self-promo is fine if it genuinely adds value and you clearly disclose what you built or who you work for. Spam, fake case studies, and low-effort promo posts won’t help the community.

How to Get Started

Introduce yourself in the comments below.

Tell the community if you’re an SEO, marketer, agency owner, founder, builder, or just exploring AI visibility.

Post something today. Even a simple question, workflow, test, or observation can spark a useful conversation.

If you know someone who would find this community useful, invite them to join.

Interested in helping out? We’re open to adding more moderators as the community grows, so feel free to reach out.

Thanks for being part of the very first wave. Together, let’s make r/AEOWorkflows a useful place for everyone working on AEO, GEO, and AI visibility.

i keep seeing more tools talk about ai visibility scores, share of voice, prompt tracking, rankings, citations, etc.

not saying that stuff is useless. it obviously matters.

but sometimes it feels like we’re making AEO/GEO too complicated too early.

most clients don’t really care about a fancy score if they don’t understand what it actually means.

they just want to know:

am i showing up?

are competitors showing up instead?

why is that happening?

what do we fix first?

that’s honestly one of the reasons i’m building in this space.

not trying to pitch anything here, but my main focus is making AEO/GEO simple enough that even someone non-technical can understand it. like, if my mom looked at it, she should understand what the ranking means, why the brand is missing, and what needs to be done next.

i feel like the best version of this category is not another complicated dashboard.

it’s more like:

here’s where you stand, here’s why, and here’s what to fix this week.

curious how others see it

hey guys im travelling to verca and surrounding area in upcoming weeks.

im looking for just chilling with nice group of people around that area. any suggestions for good places are greatly appreciated.