Is your site agent-ready? →

Home › Tools › The Reporting Integrity Check

Free check · 7 items · 4 minutes

Can your monthly report tell a surface change from a content failure?

Seven items, scored on the noes. If the report merges behaviours that move independently, every explanation built on it is a guess — including the ones that get pages rewritten.

7 items Scored on noes, not yeses 57.4-point engine spread No email

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

0 of 7 answered

The Reporting Integrity Check

Score the deck you actually send, not the dashboard you could build. Items are ordered by cost to fix, cheapest first.

Item 1

Does your monthly deck report impressions and clicks as two separate lines, with two owners and two explanations?

They now move independently. A single blended line hides which one changed.

Item 2

Do you have read access to server logs, covering at least the last 30 days?

Client-side analytics record zero AI agent fetches. Those requests exist in logs or nowhere.

Item 3

Are AI agent fetches, AI search referrals and agent workflow hops reported as three separate buckets?

Never as one “AI traffic” figure. An AI referral landing on a login or OAuth callback is workflow traversal, not discovery.

Item 4

Is every number on the slide labelled with a confidence tier — observed, inferred, or panel-derived?

Search Console has no field identifying who issued a query. Anything about agent-issued queries is inferred.

Item 5

Is AI visibility reported per engine, with any excluded series named and the exclusion justified?

A blended average across engines describes an engine nobody uses.

Item 6

Is there a citation line next to the click line?

Without it, a page being quoted without being visited is invisible.

Item 7

Before your last CTR explanation, did someone decompose the ratio and check whether impressions moved before clicks did?

CTR is a ratio. Both halves have to be read before the ratio means anything.

Your numbers (optional)

The engine figures are the ones that matter most: a single blended AI visibility number can hide a spread the size of the one we measured.

Your result
Read the method
What you are being scored against

Our own numbers, measured on our own estate and panel

We scored Merged the first time we ran this on ourselves — items 1, 3 and 4 all came back no. That is the honest baseline.

MeasuredWhat it is
57.4 pointsHighest-to-lowest engine share of voice, same day58.57% on Copilot against 1.17% on Gemini for one brand on one day. Claude was excluded as a 1.0/0.0 small-response artefact, and the exclusion stated. · Indexable, 7 September 2026, 106 custom prompts, US, 6 engines
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
55.7% of URLs, 6.4% of clicksShare of our estate in substitutable content typesClick share alone never reveals what is being quoted without being visited. · Indexable, September 2026, n = 230 pages
68.01%US searches that ended without a clickJanuary to April 2026. Third-party market context, not our estate. · SparkToro, 2026
zeroAI agent fetches recorded by client-side analyticsAgent requests do not execute your JavaScript. They exist in server logs or they exist nowhere. · Osmani, 2026

One domain, one window, one panel. Every figure here carries its own confidence tier: the zero-click counts are observed, the query-attribution reading is inferred, and the engine spread is panel-derived. A case study, not a law.

A report that cannot distinguish two behaviours will get a working page rewritten

The reporting split is one afternoon of Search Console work and one conversation about who owns which line. The citation line needs an instrument — that is the part an audit builds for you.

Get an AI search audit

Copied ✓