Review your site against the framework.

Evidence to review: Does your website provide clear, verifiable information about your business, services, products and people?
Suggested action: Gather the facts customers need and publish them on clearly linked pages.

Evidence to review: Does someone take responsibility for reviewing and updating your business information?
Suggested action: Assign an owner and review schedule. Update the content when the facts change.

Evidence to review: Do pages give consistent information and link to the current reference for each subject?
Suggested action: Resolve conflicting information and direct people to the current version.

Evidence to review: Can customers find current information about price, scope, availability and terms where appropriate?
Suggested action: Publish the commercial details customers need. Explain how to obtain a quote when a public price would not be meaningful.

Evidence to review: Do clear headings help readers find the information they need?
Suggested action: Use headings that describe the section or answer a relevant question. Not every heading needs to be a question.

Evidence to review: Do sections answer their main question clearly, with enough context to understand the answer?
Suggested action: Put the useful answer near the start of its section. Keep connected paragraphs where the explanation needs them.

Evidence to review: Can the search and retrieval systems you intend to allow access the useful content on your priority pages?
Suggested action: Check intended crawler access, rendering, canonicals, indexing and snippet controls. Review training permissions separately from search and user-requested retrieval.

Evidence to review: Do page structure and relevant markup help readers find and understand the information?
Suggested action: Use lists, tables or FAQs where they help. Add appropriate markup that agrees with the page.

Evidence to review: Are relevant numerical claims supported by sources the reader can check?
Suggested action: Attribute relevant figures and check what their sources support. Do not add statistics to meet a word-count target.

Evidence to review: Does the content draw on relevant expertise in a form suited to its subject?
Suggested action: Use relevant first-hand experience, analysis or expert contributions. Add quotations when they help the reader.

Evidence to review: Can readers check substantive claims against relevant sources?
Suggested action: Link claims to reliable sources where the subject calls for supporting evidence.

Evidence to review: Do you test how AI tools describe your business using relevant questions?
Suggested action: Record the questions, answers, models and dates for a defined set of checks.

Evidence to review: Do you investigate the findings and choose appropriate follow-up actions?
Suggested action: Check each finding before choosing an action. The answer may involve existing content, technical work or another source, rather than a new page.

Evidence to review: Do you repeat the checks and record changes over time?
Suggested action: Choose a suitable review schedule and keep comparable records.

Evidence to review: Do you record mentions, recommendations, links, competitor preference and accuracy separately?
Suggested action: Keep these observations separate so a mention is not mistaken for a recommendation or an accurate answer.

Evidence to review: Does a named person with relevant knowledge review AI-assisted content before publication?
Suggested action: Check the facts, add relevant experience and approve the finished work.

Evidence to review: Does the content offer useful original work, analysis or experience?
Suggested action: Add the evidence and detail that help the reader understand the subject.

Evidence to review: Do you review content for accuracy, usefulness and relevance?
Suggested action: Improve, combine or remove content where the evidence supports that decision. Short content is not automatically poor content.

Evidence to review: Does your content plan address customer needs and business priorities across the buying process?
Suggested action: Choose priorities using customer questions and business evidence. Keep useful introductory content alongside comparison and decision support.

Evidence to review: Do you assess meaningful outcomes alongside traffic and AI answer observations?
Suggested action: Review enquiries, conversions and relevant visits together with the answers recorded in your checks.

Evidence to review: Do you track identifiable referrals and conversions from AI services?
Suggested action: Segment identifiable AI referrals and document gaps in attribution.

Evidence to review: Do commercial pages explain who the offer suits and its important limitations?
Suggested action: Explain suitable uses, scope and trade-offs so people can compare their options.

Evidence to review: Do your business and author pages explain who you are and what you do clearly?
Suggested action: Provide concise identity information and clarify relevant cases of name confusion.

Evidence to review: Does relevant Organisation and Person markup match the visible facts and correct profiles?
Suggested action: Use suitable structured data with accurate names and verified profile links.

Evidence to review: Do you seek relevant recognition from publications or communities your audience uses?
Suggested action: Identify useful places to contribute or seek coverage based on audience relevance.

Evidence to review: Do credible external sources describe your business and its subjects accurately?
Suggested action: Review the context of mentions and build useful relationships around your work.

Evidence to review: Do important third-party profiles match your current business information?
Suggested action: Review relevant profiles and correct stale or conflicting details.

Evidence to review: Do relevant articles identify their authors and link to useful biographies?
Suggested action: Explain who wrote the content and their relevant experience.

Evidence to review: Is author identity consistent across the site, relevant profiles and structured data?
Suggested action: Connect accurate author information and the correct professional profiles.

Evidence to review: Does the writing show relevant first-hand experience where the subject calls for it?
Suggested action: Include genuine observations and examples that help explain the work.

Evidence to review: Do you share useful expertise in formats suited to relevant platforms?
Suggested action: Choose formats and communities that fit the audience and your contribution.

Evidence to review: Do you choose publishing channels based on where your audience looks for help?
Suggested action: Maintain useful channels because they serve your audience, rather than because a model might use their data.