The question is moving up the org chart: leadership has started asking whether the brand shows up when buyers ask ChatGPT, Perplexity or Google’s AI answers, and marketing owns the answer. For an in-house team that turns the tool choice into a reporting decision as much as a feature one — you have to prove the work in a number the business already trusts, and act on it inside the stack you already run. We build Cituna, one of the tools below; the others are read from each vendor’s own page on the date shown.
The in-house test:
What an in-house team needs
- Proof leadership trusts. A proprietary visibility index does not survive a board deck. A change in Search Console clicks does.
- A fit with the stack. You already run Search Console and GA4. A tool that plugs into them is a report; one that lives in its own silo is a tab nobody checks.
- Action without a dev queue. Marketing rarely owns the deploy pipeline. A tool that writes and publishes the fix routes around the engineering backlog that kills most AEO programs.
- Seats and collaboration. Content, SEO and brand all need to read the same data; per-seat taxes get in the way.
- The engines your buyers use. Coverage of the specific engines — including Claude and Grok for technical audiences — not a convenient subset.
The tools, read for a team
| Tool | Entry price | Engines | Search Console / GA4 | Writes & publishes the fix? | Seats |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cituna | $39 | 7, daily | Search Console | Yes — in 50+ languages | Per plan |
| Gauge | $599 | 6, daily | Search Console + GA4 | Bundled articles (18/mo) | Per plan |
| AthenaHQ | $0 → $295 | 5 free / 11 paid | Search Console | Paid agent (findings) | Per plan |
| Peec AI | $95 | 3 of 6 | No | No (sentiment, multi-country) | Unlimited on paid |
| Scrunch AI | $250 | 4 | No | Site audits (findings) | 5 licenses at entry |
| Otterly.ai | $29 | 4 | No | No (3 fixes/week) | Per plan |
Read from each vendor’s own page (see /compare for dates). For an in-house team the ‘Search Console’ column is often the deciding one: it is the bridge from a vendor score to a number leadership already funds.
Proving it to leadership
The report that gets a program funded is not “our AI visibility score rose 12 points.” It is a before/after: here is what ChatGPT and Perplexity said about us (naming a competitor), here are the fixes we published, and here — in Search Console, the source finance already trusts — is the lift in clicks that followed. That chain only exists if the tool ties the work back to Search Console; a tool that ends at its own index leaves you to build the bridge by hand. Cituna keeps the dated engine answers and the Search Console tie-in in one place, which is most of the board slide already made.
Fitting your stack, skipping the dev queue
Two integration points decide whether an AI visibility tool becomes a program or a graveyard tab. The first is reporting: does it reach Search Console (and, for Gauge, GA4) so it lives alongside your other numbers? The second is action: when the tool finds a gap, can your team close it without waiting on engineering to ship schema or a new page? Cituna writes the schema, FAQ markup, llms.txt and content and publishes it to your CMS, and exposes the underlying data over MCP so a data team can query it from Claude or any MCP client — both of which route around the backlog that stalls most in-house AEO efforts.
A brand in many markets
If the brand sells in more than one country, the team needs fixes in each market’s language and tracking of the engines buyers use there. Cituna writes and publishes fixes in 50-plus languages and tracks the global engines — ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, Grok, Google AI Overviews and Google AI Mode — on every plan. For multi-country share-of-voice and sentiment reporting specifically, Peec AI is built for that; note that Cituna does not score sentiment and does not track Microsoft Copilot.
Where Cituna fits
We build Cituna, and for an in-house team the honest pitch is the reporting line and the backlog it clears. It ties AI-visibility work to real clicks in Search Console — the number leadership already trusts — writes and publishes the fixes so the team acts without a dev queue, and covers seven engines from $39 a month, a spend a single marketer can approve. What it does not do: score sentiment (for brand-reputation reporting, Peec AI leads) or track Microsoft Copilot (Otterly and AthenaHQ do). Plans are $39 / $119 / $399 on our pricing page.
Next: our guide to Search Console for AI search, the metrics worth reporting, and the full best AI visibility tools comparison. Buying for an agency or as a freelancer instead? See for marketing agencies and for freelancers.
Drafted with AI assistance from our own research and Search Console data, and reviewed by Rahul A before publishing. Rules and prices change; check the linked official source before you act.