AI SEO services: rank in search, get cited in AI answers, and know exactly where the machines were used
Rankings in classic search and citations in AI answers from one programme, with a written record of which steps AI tools performed, which a named person performed, and who reviewed what.
For companies that want both kinds of visibility and that have been burned, or worry about being burned, by an agency that quietly swapped its writers for a chatbot.
Updated
What are AI SEO services?
AI SEO services means two things, and a buyer should ask which one a vendor is selling. The first is SEO for AI-driven search: making a site rank in classic results and get cited when ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google's AI Overviews and AI Mode, Gemini, or Copilot compose an answer. The second is SEO done with AI: using language models and machine learning in the agency's own workflow for keyword clustering, log-file analysis, content gap detection, structured data generation, and QA. At Seorythm, AI SEO is both, with a rule for each. For AI search we run the answer engine and generative engine optimization work described on those pages, on top of the technical, on-page, and link work that makes a page retrievable. For AI in delivery we use models where they are faster and at least as accurate as a person (research, clustering, crawling and log analysis, prompt sampling, spelling and schema checks) and never for the parts that carry your name: final copy, claims and figures, outreach messages, and decisions about what to publish. Each report lists which steps were machine-assisted, so you can see the line rather than take our word for it.
What you get
| Deliverable | Cadence | What it includes |
|---|---|---|
| Dual-visibility audit | Weeks 1 to 2 | Classic ranking and technical audit plus the AI visibility audit (40 to 80 prompts across six engines). One roadmap that ranks fixes by effect on both. |
| AI-assisted diagnosis | Month 1, then continuous | Machine-assisted crawl and log analysis, keyword clustering by intent, content gap detection against the fan-out map, and duplicate and thin-page detection. Every finding is verified by a person before it reaches the roadmap. |
| Technical, on-page, and link work | Per the roadmap | The same technical SEO, on-page SEO, and link building described on those pages, prioritised for both retrieval and ranking. |
| AI search layer | From month 2 | Answer-first passage restructuring, entity and fact consistency, crawler access, citation-source mentions, and prompt tracking, as described on the AEO and GEO pages. |
| Method disclosure | Every report | A short section in each report stating which steps used AI tools, which were done by a named person, and who reviewed each published change. Written so your legal or compliance team can read it. |
| Reporting | Monthly | Rankings, organic traffic, and conversions for classic search; inclusion and citation share per engine for AI search; and the referral traffic that followed from each. |
How the work is done
One audit, two kinds of visibility
The audit is the same two-week audit we run for every client, with the AI visibility audit folded in: classic technical and content review, plus 40 to 80 buyer prompts run across ChatGPT, Perplexity, AI Overviews and AI Mode, Gemini, Claude, and Copilot. The roadmap that comes out ranks each fix by its effect on both kinds of visibility, because most fixes move both. A page that cannot be crawled is invisible to Googlebot and to GPTBot alike; a passage that answers a question in its first sentence ranks better and gets quoted more.
Where we use AI, and where we refuse to
We use models for the work that is tedious, large, and checkable: clustering tens of thousands of keywords by intent, reading server logs to find crawl waste, comparing your pages against the question map to find gaps, drafting structured data, checking spelling and heading hierarchy across a crawl, and sampling prompts across engines every month. Each of these produces a result a person can verify against the source, and a person does.
We do not use models to write the pages that carry your name, to invent or round the figures on them, to write outreach to publishers, or to decide what to publish. Google’s guidance on AI-generated content is that helpful content is rewarded however it is made and that content produced primarily to manipulate rankings is spam, and its scaled content abuse policy names generation at volume without added value. The line we draw keeps every attributable word on the right side of that, and it also happens to be the line that generative engines draw when choosing whom to cite.
The programme underneath
Nothing about AI search changes what makes a page retrievable. The technical SEO work (crawl access, rendering, speed, indexation), the on-page SEO work (intent match, structure, internal links), and the link building work (earned references from sites that matter in your category) are the same as in our SEO services programme and follow the same methodology. What AI-assisted delivery changes is the speed of diagnosis and the size of site we can review carefully, not the standard for what ships.
The AI search layer on top
From the second month the programme adds the AI search layer: answer-first passage restructuring, crawler access rules for the AI user agents, llms.txt, entity and fact consistency across your site and profiles, and mentions on the sources each engine cites in your category. The detail lives on the answer engine optimization page for conversational assistants and the generative engine optimization page for Google’s AI Overviews and AI Mode. In this programme they are not separate purchases; they are the last layer of the same roadmap.
Measured twice
Each monthly report has two halves. The first is classic: rankings, organic sessions, and conversions, from Search Console and your analytics. The second is AI search: inclusion and citation share per engine for the prompt set, competitor share, and the referral traffic that engines sent. Between them sits the method disclosure, a short section stating which steps that month were machine-assisted, which were done by a named person, and who reviewed each change that went live. It is the part of the report most clients skip and the part their compliance teams read first.
If the AI search layer is all you need, it is available on its own; see pricing. For one team covering both, start with the audit. For what the acronyms mean and where they overlap, read SEO vs AEO vs GEO vs AIO vs LLMO vs SXO.
What it costs
Priced as the SEO programme
AI SEO is how we deliver the full programme, so it is priced the same way. The $2,800 audit includes the AI visibility audit. The 90-day sprint runs $4,800 to $7,400 a month and the retainer $2,300 to $4,900. Companies that only want the AI search layer can buy it as a standalone programme at $1,200 to $4,000 a month.
What moves the number
- Site size and the number of templates that need technical work
- Pages produced or restructured per month
- Link acquisition volume and method
- Prompts tracked and engines covered on the AI search side
Who this is not for
- Companies looking for cheap volume content. We will not publish unedited model output under your name, and a vendor who will is charging you for something an engine will ignore.
- Anyone who wants "AI" in the proposal but does not want to know where it was used. We disclose the line in every report, and some buyers prefer not to see it.
- Sites with no product, reviews, or public footprint yet. Both search engines and AI engines work from what other sources already say about you.
- Buyers who expect guaranteed positions or guaranteed citations. Neither exists, and a vendor promising them is telling you how they will get there.
Risks and how we manage them
| Risk | How we manage it |
|---|---|
| A model produces a plausible but wrong finding in the audit. | Machine-assisted findings are labelled as such and verified by a person against the crawl, the logs, or the page before they reach the roadmap. Nothing is shipped from an unverified finding. |
| Google's spam policies treat scaled content as abuse. | We do not produce content at scale. Pages are written by a named person, published at the rate your reviewer can handle, and each carries an author and a date. |
| Engines change how they treat AI-assisted pages. | Because the parts engines attribute (claims, figures, authorship) are always human-produced and reviewed, a policy change aimed at generated text does not reach them. |
| Tooling costs quietly inflate the fee. | AI tooling is our cost, not a line on your invoice. The fee is driven by hours, pages, links, and prompts, and each is itemised. |
Is AI-generated content bad for SEO?
Not by itself. Google's published position is that it rewards helpful content however it is produced and acts against content generated primarily to manipulate rankings. In practice the problem with AI-generated pages is not the tool but the outcome: text that says what every other page says, invents figures, and carries nobody's name. That content is exactly what generative engines skip when choosing a source, and it is what Google's spam policies on scaled content abuse target. The safe uses are the ones where the model does work a person would check anyway: first drafts of structured data, outline options, summaries of research, clustering thousands of keywords, finding pages that answer a question nobody asked. The unsafe uses are publishing unedited model output at volume, generating reviews or testimonials, and letting a model decide what is true about your product. Our rule is simple: a person writes and signs anything a reader or an engine will attribute to you, and the model helps them get there faster.
Questions buyers ask
What is an AI SEO company?
A company that sells search visibility in the AI era, which can mean optimising for AI-driven search results, using AI tools to deliver SEO faster, or both. Ask any AI SEO company two questions before signing. Which parts of the work does a model do, and which does a person do? And how do you measure visibility inside AI answers, where there is no rank? If the answers are vague, the AI is marketing.
Do you use ChatGPT to write our pages?
No. We use models for research, clustering, log analysis, prompt sampling, schema drafts, and QA. Final copy, figures, claims, and outreach are written by a named person and reviewed by your expert. Each report lists where the line fell that month.
How is AI SEO different from AEO or GEO?
AEO and GEO are the AI search layer, the work of getting cited in answers from ChatGPT, Perplexity, AI Overviews, and the rest. AI SEO is the whole programme, classic rankings plus that layer, delivered with AI tools in the workflow where they help. If you already have SEO covered and only want citations, buy the AI search programme. If you want one team for both, this is it.
How much do AI SEO services cost?
The same as our SEO programme, because it is our SEO programme. Audit $2,800, sprint $4,800 to $7,400 a month, retainer $2,300 to $4,900 a month, standalone AI search programme $1,200 to $4,000 a month. Every figure is 20% below the closest published benchmark; the comparison is on the pricing page.
Will AI search kill SEO traffic?
It is taking clicks from informational queries, and for some of those the AI answer is the end of the journey. It is not taking the buyer who needs a price, a comparison, a demo, or a supplier. The programme is built to measure both effects separately and to move budget toward the queries that still lead somewhere.
Can you show which of our competitors use AI content?
We can show which of their pages have the fingerprints (generic passages, no author, template phrasing, no specific figures) and, more usefully, which of their pages are being cited by AI engines and why. The second list is the one worth acting on.
Start with the audit.
Two weeks, fixed price, and a prioritised list you can act on with or without us. If SEO is not the right channel for you, the audit will say so.