{"slug": "show-hn-inspect-ai-recommendation-evidence-and-turn-findings-into-website-tasks", "title": "Show HN: Inspect AI recommendation evidence and turn findings into website tasks", "summary": "AI Cite Who launched a recommendation-audit tool that checks whether brands are cited in answers from ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity, saving the evidence for each platform and generating a website and external action report. The service costs $49.90 per month for Plus, which includes a 7-day free trial with 50 trial credits and 300 monthly credits, and $99.90 per month for Pro, with annual billing about 17% cheaper than monthly; Markdown handoffs are available on Plus and Pro, while HTML and scheduled audits require Pro. The tool is aimed at brands and website owners with a public site and a clear product who want to see which customer questions their offering is recommended for and turn the findings into tasks.", "body_md": "### See where you stand\n\nReview recommendations for the questions that matter.\n\nAI RECOMMENDATION AUDITS\n\nFor brands and website owners: inspect recommendations for customer questions, review the sources, and decide what to improve.\n\nRecommendation audits require Plus or Pro access.\n\nAI Cite Who combines public website analysis with independent recommendation checks on selected, available ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity platforms. It retains evidence for each platform and produces one website and external action report.\n\nAI Cite Who (AICiteWho)\n\nKeep answer citations, search candidates and page facts distinct.\n\nUse page plans, required facts and completion checks.\n\nExplore the demo: switch the sidebar and report tabs to see each view.\n\nexample.com\n\n2 questions · 3 platforms\n\nChatGPT · Gemini · Perplexity\n\nCompare outcomes for each question, then review the page facts and suggested tasks.\n\nSuggested next action\n\n| Customer question | ChatGPT | Gemini | Perplexity | \n|---|---|---|---|\n| Which feedback tools work without client accounts? | Not recommended | Recommended | Unknown | \n| What can replace email threads for design reviews? | Mentioned only | Not mentioned | Recommended | \n\nA suggested task does not establish why an AI omitted the brand.\n\nOpen a saved report to revisit its questions and results. This entry belongs to the fictional demo.\n\nWHO IT IS FOR\n\nA public website, a clear product or service, and someone ready to act on the findings matter more than an industry label.\n\nCheck which tools are recommended for customer tasks and buying constraints.\n\nClarify product fit, comparisons and facts buyers can verify.\n\nInvestigate category and product-selection questions relevant to your own brand.\n\nReview product information, public proof and useful buying guidance.\n\nCheck how buyers encounter providers for a particular need or requirement.\n\nExplain your offering, suitable customers and verifiable expertise.\n\nReview selected questions across the website projects included in your plan.\n\nGive the site owner or implementer an evidence-led brief and repeatable scope.\n\nMost useful when buyers ask for products or providers, your offering has public evidence, and you can review and implement the suggested work.\n\nFor ecommerce, this is a brand and public-page audit: product-feed management, inventory sync and order attribution are outside its scope.\n\nReview the observed outcome and page evidence before choosing a change.\n\nIllustrative data · fictional project\n\nWhich feedback tools work without client accounts?\n\nThe brand was not recommended in this saved answer.\n\nDownload a Markdown handoff, open your website project in an AI coding tool, and review suitable changes.\n\nMarkdown: Plus and Pro · HTML and scheduled audits: Pro\n\nThird-party plans help you prepare useful contributions and review publication rules. Nothing is published automatically.\n\nANONYMIZED SELF-AUDIT\n\nAudited September 28, 2026\n\nThe edited case connects saved observations and source roles to website tasks.\n\nOne historical sample. Competitor and source identities are anonymized.\n\nPricing\n\nChoose your scope. Confirm the exact credit quote before paid work.\n\n$0\n\n$49.90 / month\n\n7 days free with 50 trial credits. A payment card is required through Waffo. Then auto-renews at $49.90/month.\n\n$99.90 / month\n\nMonthly credits do not roll over. All paid prices exclude tax. Annual billing costs about 17% less than paying monthly. Subscriptions renew automatically until cancelled from your account.\n\nCOMMON QUESTIONS\n\nSaved question outcomes, source references and practical website or third-party actions. Plus and Pro include a Markdown AI handoff and an execution prompt.\n\nWhen offered, verified accounts with no previous trial or paid subscription can try Plus for 7 days with 50 one-time credits by providing a payment card through Waffo. After the trial, Plus auto-renews at $49.90/month plus applicable tax, with 300 monthly credits. If you wish to cancel, do so in Account Billing at least 1 hour before the trial ends to avoid the first charge. Successful cancellation ends trial access and forfeits unused trial credits immediately. Using all 50 credits does not start billing early. Early paid conversion is unavailable; after cancellation, a new subscription must wait until the original trial period ends.\n\nChoose available ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity platforms before running an audit. Review each platform’s question results and available source evidence separately. Unavailable or failed checks remain unknown.\n\nNo. The workflow can suit independent ecommerce brands, digital products, B2B products and professional services with public website evidence and relevant buyer questions. Agencies can use the projects included in their plan. It is a brand and public-page audit, not a product-feed, inventory or order-tracking service.\n\nWebsite analysis reviews sampled public pages for clarity, coverage, trust and structured data. AI recommendation audits are a separate paid step using selected questions and platforms.\n\nNo. Download the handoff, open your website project in an AI coding tool with project access, and review suitable changes. Third-party contributions need their own rules review and publication decision.\n\nEach new audit uses its selected scope, including a repeat check of saved questions. A complete audit costs 10 + 2 × questions + questions × (platforms − 1) credits. Exact brand-name checks and the action report are included; confirm the quote before starting.\n\nNo. The report helps you improve the clarity and verifiability of public information. Re-check comparable questions and platforms to observe changes; a different answer does not establish that an edit caused it.\n\nChoose an AI visibility workflow, inspect recommendation evidence and turn supported findings into website work.\n\nStart with your website. Build a question set, inspect the evidence and turn supported findings into work.", "url": "https://wpnews.pro/news/show-hn-inspect-ai-recommendation-evidence-and-turn-findings-into-website-tasks", "canonical_source": "https://aicitewho.com/", "published_at": "2026-10-24 07:47:51+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-10-24 08:12:32.452283+00:00", "lang": "en", "topics": ["generative-engine-optimization", "ai-search"], "entities": ["AI Cite Who", "ChatGPT", "Gemini", "Perplexity", "Waffo"], "also_reported_by": [], "alternates": {"html": "https://wpnews.pro/news/show-hn-inspect-ai-recommendation-evidence-and-turn-findings-into-website-tasks", "markdown": "https://wpnews.pro/news/show-hn-inspect-ai-recommendation-evidence-and-turn-findings-into-website-tasks.md", "text": "https://wpnews.pro/news/show-hn-inspect-ai-recommendation-evidence-and-turn-findings-into-website-tasks.txt", "jsonld": "https://wpnews.pro/news/show-hn-inspect-ai-recommendation-evidence-and-turn-findings-into-website-tasks.jsonld"}}