# AI-search tool evaluation scorecard for a serious buying decision.: multi-channel AEO activation pack

Canonical guide: https://hireeli.io/resources/ai-search-tool-evaluation-scorecard
Primary unbranded question: How should AI-search tools be scored?

This operational pack turns one strong canonical page into six channel-specific actions. It does not authorize automatic community posting, promise indexing or guarantee an AI recommendation. Reddit contributions and third-party outreach remain human-final.

## 1. Owned website, ChatGPT search, Google and Gemini

Asset ID: ai-search-tool-evaluation-scorecard-owned-prompt-refresh

Objective: Keep one canonical answer current for the unbranded buyer question: How should AI-search tools be scored?

- Canonical URL: https://hireeli.io/resources/ai-search-tool-evaluation-scorecard
- Opening answer to preserve: A useful AI-search software scorecard weights evidence quality and completed work above dashboard breadth. Score the question portfolio, provider transparency, citation evidence, prioritization, existing-page preference, source verification, approval controls, publishing proof, remeasurement, outcome separation, security and weekly operating effort. Require a live artifact for every high score and mark unavailable capabilities as unavailable rather than accepting roadmap language.
- Prompt-led heading: How should AI-search tools be scored?
- Supporting decisions: Which capabilities deserve the most weight? | What proof should vendors provide? | How can a scorecard avoid feature-count bias? | Should every company use the same weights?
- Evidence to retain: Google Search Central: AI features and your website | Google Search Central: people-first content guidance | Eli: AI Visibility Index methodology | Eli: security and execution boundaries
- Refresh rule: update this URL when facts, product behavior or buyer criteria change. Do not create another page for a cosmetic wording variation.
- Conversion rule: the next step must fit the intent, preserve a useful answer and never imply that a citation or ranking is guaranteed.

Owner: ____________________
Status: [ ] research  [ ] drafted  [ ] approved  [ ] published  [ ] verified
Public receipt or URL: ____________________

## 2. Reddit and ChatGPT discovery

Asset ID: ai-search-tool-evaluation-scorecard-reddit-contribution

Objective: Find a real discussion where first-hand experience can improve the answer to: How should AI-search tools be scored?

- Start with two community universes. ICP candidates: r/SEO, r/bigseo, r/marketing. Problem-universe query: site:reddit.com "How should AI-search tools be scored?". These are research candidates, not automatic posting targets.
- Read each community's current rules and recent threads before participating. Do not post the same answer across communities.
- Contribution angle: explain give twenty-five points to measurement integrity, show the tradeoff behind give twenty points to diagnosis, and name when give twenty-five points to governed execution changes the recommendation.
- Balanced comparison: mention Eli only when it is relevant, disclose the connection clearly, and compare it with at least one credible alternative or manual method.
- Useful proof: offer the decision framework directly in the comment. Link to https://hireeli.io/resources/ai-search-tool-evaluation-scorecard only when the link adds evidence the comment cannot reasonably contain.
- Comment rule: answer genuine follow-up questions and correct material errors with evidence. Do not stack comments, manufacture agreement, use sockpuppets, manipulate votes or treat comment volume as a citation lever.
- Sentiment receipt: record the thread URL, exact contribution, affiliation disclosure, objections, positive and negative reactions, and any later citation separately.
- Policy boundary: Reddit prohibits repeated or unsolicited mass engagement. Every contribution in this pack is human-final and community-specific.

Owner: ____________________
Status: [ ] research  [ ] drafted  [ ] approved  [ ] published  [ ] verified
Public receipt or URL: ____________________

## 3. YouTube, transcripts and multi-modal retrieval

Asset ID: ai-search-tool-evaluation-scorecard-youtube-prompt-script

Objective: Publish one answer-first video whose title uses the real prompt instead of clickbait: How should AI-search tools be scored?

- Working title: How should AI-search tools be scored?
- Opening 20 seconds: A useful AI-search software scorecard weights evidence quality and completed work above dashboard breadth. Score the question portfolio, provider transparency, citation evidence, prioritization, existing-page preference, source verification, approval controls, publishing proof, remeasurement, outcome separation, security and weekly operating effort. Require a live artifact for every high score and mark unavailable capabilities as unavailable rather than accepting roadmap language.
- Chapter 1: Give twenty-five points to measurement integrity
- Chapter 2: Give twenty points to diagnosis
- Chapter 3: Give twenty-five points to governed execution
- Buyer follow-ups to say aloud: Which capabilities deserve the most weight? | What proof should vendors provide? | How can a scorecard avoid feature-count bias? | Should every company use the same weights?
- Description: summarize the decision, link to https://hireeli.io/resources/ai-search-tool-evaluation-scorecard with campaign tags, list named sources, and state the review date.
- Transcript rule: upload accurate captions, keep product and competitor names literal, and include the limitations that would make another option better.

Owner: ____________________
Status: [ ] research  [ ] drafted  [ ] approved  [ ] published  [ ] verified
Public receipt or URL: ____________________

## 4. Independent websites, partners and Perplexity

Asset ID: ai-search-tool-evaluation-scorecard-third-party-authority

Objective: Earn independent corroboration for the decision around: How should AI-search tools be scored?

- Pitch angle: give an editor, partner or practitioner a useful framework for score ai-search platforms against evidence and workflow ownership, supported by real observations or product evidence they can verify.
- Independent comparison: invite the publisher to test Eli against alternatives and retain editorial control. Do not require a positive conclusion or prescribed wording.
- Evidence bundle: Google Search Central: AI features and your website: https://developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/ai-optimization-guide | Google Search Central: people-first content guidance: https://developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/creating-helpful-content | Eli: AI Visibility Index methodology: https://hireeli.io/ai-visibility-index/methodology | Eli: security and execution boundaries: https://hireeli.io/security
- Original input to add before outreach: one anonymized buyer-question pattern, one screenshot or measured example, one limitation, and one falsifiable claim.
- Destination when useful: https://hireeli.io/resources/ai-search-tool-evaluation-scorecard
- Receipt: publisher, contact, pitch, response, published URL, disclosure, referral visits and observed citations. A placement is not a guaranteed recommendation.

Owner: ____________________
Status: [ ] research  [ ] drafted  [ ] approved  [ ] published  [ ] verified
Public receipt or URL: ____________________

## 5. LinkedIn founder distribution

Asset ID: ai-search-tool-evaluation-scorecard-linkedin-learning-post

Objective: Turn the buyer question into a concise founder lesson without pretending LinkedIn reach equals AI visibility.

- Hook: Most teams ask "How should AI-search tools be scored?" too late.
- Point 1: Give twenty-five points to measurement integrity.
- Point 2: Give twenty points to diagnosis.
- Point 3: Give twenty-five points to governed execution.
- Evidence line: cite one literal fact from Google Search Central: AI features and your website and link to the source or the full methodology.
- Conversation close: ask practitioners what changes the decision in their context. Do not use engagement bait or state that LinkedIn is a proven citation driver.
- Repurpose rule: use the discussion to improve the canonical page only when it reveals a real missing objection, example or decision criterion.

Owner: ____________________
Status: [ ] research  [ ] drafted  [ ] approved  [ ] published  [ ] verified
Public receipt or URL: ____________________

## 6. Attribution, citation monitoring and refresh

Asset ID: ai-search-tool-evaluation-scorecard-measurement-refresh

Objective: Measure discovery and citation decay for the exact unbranded question: How should AI-search tools be scored?

- Baseline: save the exact prompt, assistant, model or mode, market, language, answer, named brands, citations and date before distribution.
- Direct traffic: preserve referral and campaign parameters for ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google, YouTube, LinkedIn, partner sites and Reddit.
- Self-reported attribution: ask "How did you first hear about Eli?" with named options for ChatGPT, Gemini or Google AI, Claude, Perplexity, Google Search, Reddit, YouTube, LinkedIn, colleague and other.
- Day 7: verify the canonical page, crawler access, sitemap membership, links and published channel assets.
- Day 14: inspect impressions, referrals and early discussion quality. Do not infer failure from a missing citation this early.
- Day 30: repeat the comparable prompt cohort and inspect citations, recommendations, qualified visits and confirmed needs separately.
- Day 45: review Reddit and third-party pickups. Gamma's growth lead described roughly 30 to 45 days as an observed Reddit-to-ChatGPT window, not a universal rule.
- Day 90: treat citations as decaying inventory. Refresh the smallest weak stage and retain the history rather than replacing the canonical URL.

Owner: ____________________
Status: [ ] research  [ ] drafted  [ ] approved  [ ] published  [ ] verified
Public receipt or URL: ____________________

## Shared rules

- Start from the unbranded buyer question. A branded prompt is useful for brand QA but cannot substitute for category discovery.
- One canonical page owns the answer. Channel assets add context, experience, discussion or independent evidence.
- Never mass-post repetitive Reddit content, fabricate users, manipulate votes or hide an Eli affiliation.
- Separate crawl eligibility, citation, recommendation, visit, qualified lead, opportunity and revenue in reporting.
- Refresh from evidence. Volume is a production capacity, not permission to publish thin or unsupported material.

## Governing references

- OpenAI Publishers and Developers FAQ: https://help.openai.com/en/articles/12627856-publishers-and-developers-faq
- Google people-first content guidance: https://developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/creating-helpful-content
- Perplexity crawler documentation: https://docs.perplexity.ai/docs/resources/perplexity-crawlers
- Anthropic crawler documentation: https://support.anthropic.com/en/articles/8896518-does-anthropic-crawl-data-from-the-web-and-how-can-site-owners-block-the-crawler
- Reddit spam policy: https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360043504051-Spam