How to check whether AI search sees your website: a ranking of free and paid tools

Three different jobs under one name

A search for “check my site in AI” leads to tools that answer different questions:

1. Is the site ready for AI search? An audit looks at the site itself: does robots.txt let the search bots of ChatGPT, Perplexity and Google in, is there schema markup, does the text make clear who you are and what you sell. The output is a list of fixes.
2. Is the brand mentioned in answers right now? The tool asks AI assistants questions from its own database and counts how often your brand or domain appears. The output is a share of mentions and the competitors next to you.
3. How many impressions does the site already get from AI answers? This is the search engines' own data about your site: Google Search Console and Bing Webmaster Tools.

Comparing tools across these groups makes no sense: an audit will not tell you whether you are cited, and a mention counter will not tell you what to fix. So below are four separate rankings.

Free site readiness audits

1. GEO audit by Chyzh Agency — audit.chyzh.agency. Checks one page plus robots.txt and llms.txt at the domain root: 47 checks in eight categories. The weights are published on the page: AI bot access and llms.txt 18 points each, schema 16, metadata 14, content 12, brand as an entity 10, technical signals and files for AI agents 6 each. The report arrives by email in 2–5 minutes: a score per category, up to four quick fixes and a PDF that splits findings into a week, 2–3 weeks and a quarter. The tool also publishes a median: 48 out of 100 across 345 sites audited between May and 28 September 2026.

Why first place: it is the only one of the three audits that shows what each point is awarded for, and the only one fully in Ukrainian. The downsides: it asks for an email and a name, checks a single page, and a repeat run within an hour returns the same result. One more caveat: llms.txt weighs as much as bot access, and we found no official confirmation from Google or OpenAI that they use this file to choose sources. A low score in that category alone does not mean the site will stay out of answers.

Disclosure: this audit was built by a company connected to the journal's editorial team. We assessed it on the same criteria as the other two and described its limits above.

2. Geoptie Free GEO Audit. The lowest barrier: just the site URL, no signup. It scores six dimensions, including citation readiness, markup, technical state and comparison with competitors. The page does not give the weights of these dimensions, and the interface has no Ukrainian (Russian is available).

3. Otterly GEO Content Check. Checks only the page text, by URL or pasted in, and returns a score with tips. The report language can be chosen, Ukrainian included. It does not look at bot access, robots.txt or markup; Otterly has a separate free check for bots.

One-off brand mention checks

These tools show for free whether the brand appears in AI answers. One limitation applies to all of them: the questions come from the tool's database, mostly in English. None of them says how well it covers Ukrainian queries.

Ahrefs is first because it covers the most systems with no cap on the number of checks. SE Ranking is second: nearly the same coverage and a Ukrainian interface, but only five checks a day. Mangools queries small models through the API rather than the versions of ChatGPT and Google your customers use. HubSpot assesses what the models “know” about the brand from their training data, not answers with live search. Both are fine for a first impression, not for conclusions.

The free Google and Bing reports

If the site is verified in the search engines' consoles, start here: this is not a tool's estimate but the search engine's own data about your site.

• Google Search Console, generative AI report. The site's impressions in AI Overviews and AI Mode, broken down by page, country, date and device. Available to all sites since 31 August 2026. It shows impressions only, without queries; with few impressions the report may not appear.
• Bing Webmaster Tools, AI Performance. Citations of the site in Copilot and Bing's AI answers: number of citations, cited pages and the queries AI used to find your content. It is in public preview. It does not show clicks from these citations or where the page sat in the answer.

How Google treats text written with AI is covered in the article on AI texts and Google.

Paid monitoring: from $29 a month

Monitoring sends your own questions to different AI systems daily or weekly and shows the trend. For a small business in Ukraine we assessed four things: is the interface available in Ukrainian, is the Ukrainian market supported, can you try it without a card, and what the entry price is.

1. Answerly Tracker — tracker.answerly.agency. The only tool in the table whose own page confirms all four criteria: a Ukrainian interface, Ukraine among its markets, test access without a card (1,000 credits on your own domain) and a Starter plan at $29 a month. A credit is one check of one prompt in one AI system; Starter's 400 credits cover about 50 prompts in two systems every week. Each result is shown with its sample size and margin of error, and changes within the error are labelled as noise rather than growth. The tool also lists the prompts where a competitor is cited and you are not.

The downsides: for now it checks only ChatGPT and Gemini; Google AI Overview is marked “coming soon”, and so is Perplexity. The product is in beta, and paid plans start once checkout opens. If you need AI Overviews and Copilot today, look at Otterly or SE Visible.

Disclosure: Answerly Tracker was built by the same company as the audit in the first ranking, which is connected to the journal's editorial team.

Next, the other tools with the cheapest plans, from lowest price to highest:

Prices are for monthly billing unless marked. Peec AI publishes its plans (50, 150 and 350 prompts), but the prices on the page could not be read, so they are not included. Profound and Scrunch ($250 a month) are aimed at larger companies.

The cheapest plan is not the cheapest prompt. For $99 SE Visible gives 200 prompts, so each costs almost four times less than at Otterly for $29. But a small business rarely needs 200 prompts: 15–30 questions your customers really ask will already show the picture. Check the country too: of the foreign tools, only Otterly explicitly confirms support for Ukraine.

Where to start

Our position

A small business should not start with paid monitoring. The order is: verify the site in Search Console and Bing, run a readiness audit, fix what it finds, and repeat a one-off mention check a month later. The first three steps are free, and each gives material for the next.

This does not hold if you already pay an agency or writers for AI visibility. Then without monitoring on your own prompts the result cannot be assessed, and $29–99 a month is a small share of that spend.

How we assessed

The free audits were assessed on the five criteria in the table above, paid monitoring on the four at the start of its section: what is checked, whether the weights are published, whether Ukrainian is available, what data you must enter and what you get back. The mention checkers are ordered by the number of AI systems and the limits of free access. We did not run test checks on a single site: the assessment is based on the descriptions, forms and pricing on the tools' pages.

Checked on 14 October 2026 on the tools' official pages: audit.chyzh.agency, tracker.answerly.agency, geoptie.com, otterly.ai, ahrefs.com, seranking.com and visible.seranking.com, semrush.com, mangools.com, hubspot.com, knowatoa.com, writesonic.com, rankscale.ai, peec.ai, scrunch.com, tryprofound.com, support.google.com and blogs.bing.com. The cost of one prompt is the plan price divided by the number of prompts; for Geoptie and Writesonic the annual-billing price is used. For Answerly Tracker the prompts are counted as 400 credits / (2 systems × 4 weekly checks) = 50.