Is your site agent-ready? →

Home › Tools › The B2B Demand-Shape Check

Free check · 6 items · 4 minutes

Does your keyword plan match how buying committees search?

Six to ten people research one purchase from different jobs, and they arrive in sentences. This check compares the shape of your demand against the shape of ours — and names the committee roles you have no coverage for.

6 items Committee roles named Head vs question gap No email

No email required. Nothing is sent anywhere — your answers stay in this browser.

0 of 6 answered

The B2B Demand-Shape Check

Answer for the plan currently funding your content. “Not sure” scores as no.

Item 1

Have you exported every Search Console query of eight words or more, or ending in a question mark, ignoring volume entirely?

Volume filters delete exactly the demand that converts in B2B.

Item 2

Is every one of those sentences mapped to a committee role — security, finance, practitioner, executive?

An unmapped question set produces content for nobody in particular.

Item 3

Has operational traffic — login, single sign-on, OAuth callback, redirect — been stripped out of the discovery number before any share was computed?

Your own customers logging in are not discovery. This is free to fix and it changes what every other number means.

Item 4

Have you joined your top-impression pages to the URLs AI engines actually cite, and listed the top-10 pages with zero citations?

The gap list. Every top-10 page with no citation belongs on it.

Item 5

Have you verified AI Overview presence live, with a positive control, in the last 30 days?

Rather than reading a cached SERP-features field.

Item 6

Can you name the domains cited in your category when you are not?

With an n and a date attached.

Your numbers (optional)

The first two produce the gap this piece is about: where your head terms sit against where your questions sit.

Your result
Read the method
What you are being scored against

Our own numbers, measured on our own estate

We scored Term-bound on targeting and Unmeasured on retrieval the first time we ran this on ourselves. Read your numbers against these rows, not against a generic threshold.

MeasuredWhat it is
27.0–91.7 vs 2.0–12.7Our head-term positions against our full-sentence question positionsTen category head terms spanned positions 27.0 to 91.7, nine of them at position 60 or worse. The question-shaped queries on the same property and window sat between 2.0 and 12.7, four of the six inside 2.0 to 5.3. · Indexable, Search Console 90 days to 8 September 2026
401 of 495Zero-click page-one queries that ran 8+ words or ended in a question markThe demand that arrives in sentences, not head terms. · Indexable, 28-day Search Console window to 6 September 2026
14 of 17Top-10 pages with zero AI citationsOur own estate: 17 pages ranked in Google's top 10 (average position 10 or better), and 3 of them were cited by an AI engine. · Indexable, 7 September 2026, n = 223 pages
at least 543 queries / 7,038 impressionsPage-one queries that earned zero clicks in 28 daysEight queries earned any click, and all eight were brand or navigational. "At least" is deliberate: the export caps at 500 rows per slice, so this is a floor, not a census. · Indexable, 28-day Search Console window to 6 September 2026

One domain, two windows. Search Console position is an impression-weighted average across queries, devices and countries — treat absolute positions as directional. A case study, not a law.

The sentences are already in your Search Console export

Item 1 costs an afternoon and needs no new tooling. Mapping them to committee roles is the part that changes what gets commissioned.

Get an AI search audit

Copied ✓