Ask for proof from sites like yours in their own Search Console data, how they will measure AI Overview and AI Mode visibility, exactly what they will change and why, who owns every account, and how you leave. Google says its AI features need no special optimisation, so treat any secret AI method as a warning sign.
Google now publishes its own pages on hiring an SEO and on generative AI features, which gives you a free yardstick. Every claim in a pitch should survive a comparison with them, and where an agency disagrees with Google, the burden is on the agency to show evidence and say who carries the risk if it is wrong. The questions below are grouped so you can run them in one call and score the answers afterwards. A kitchen fitter with a ten-page website is the running example.
Six pitch claims, and what Google's guidance says about each
In May 2026 Google published a guide to optimising for generative AI features in Search, including a section that busts common "AEO" and "GEO" myths. Its page on third-party SEO advice adds that Google does not evaluate third-party services and that tools cannot guarantee performance. Put those two pages beside the proposal and the common pitches sort themselves out.
| What the agency says | What Google's guidance says | What to ask |
|---|---|---|
| "We use a proprietary GEO method that gets you into AI answers." | Optimising for generative AI search is the same job as SEO. There are no additional requirements or special optimisations for AI Overviews and AI Mode, and the fundamentals still apply. | Which of your recommendations goes beyond Google's own guide, and what is your evidence for it? |
| "You need an llms.txt file and AI-specific markup." | You do not need AI text files, new markup or Markdown to appear in Google Search, because Search does not use them. No special schema.org markup is needed either. | Is llms.txt in the price, and which Google feature does it change? |
| "We will chunk and rewrite your pages so AI can read them." | There is no requirement to break content into tiny pieces or write in a special way for AI, and there is no ideal page length. | What did you see change after chunking a comparable site? |
| "We will build mentions and links for you across the web." | Seeking inauthentic mentions is not as helpful as it seems, and buying or selling links for ranking is link spam. | Where will each mention or link come from, and can I approve the list? |
| "We will publish a page for every question people ask AI." | Creating pages for every fan-out query mainly to manipulate results breaks the scaled content abuse policy, and a high page count does not make a site better. | How many new pages, written by whom, reviewed by whom? |
| "Our tool uses Google's own data to score you." | No third-party tool has access to Google's internal ranking or AI systems, and tools cannot guarantee performance. | Where does the score come from, and how is it calculated? |
None of this means every agency using these terms is dishonest. Some agencies sell llms.txt files and tidy structured data as cheap extras, which is harmless if the invoice says so. The problem starts when the extra is presented as the reason you will appear in Google's AI features. For deeper reading on individual points, the series covers whether llms.txt works and scaled content abuse in AI content.
Proof: evidence you can check without trusting the agency
Google's own page on hiring an SEO suggests asking for examples of previous work and success stories, checking business references, asking how results will be measured and over what timeframe, and finding out whether the agency will share every change it makes to your site. Those are the right starting points. For an AI-era pitch, tighten each one into something you can verify.
- Show me Search Console for two or three similar clients. Ask for clicks and impressions by page, six months either side of the work, shared with the client's permission. A screenshot of a rising line with no axis labels is not proof.
- What exactly changed, and on which dates? A real agency keeps a change log. Without one, nobody can say what caused a movement.
- What else changed in the same months? Seasonality, a price cut, a redesign or an advertising burst can all move a graph. Many local-service businesses have a busy season whoever is doing the SEO.
- Which result disappointed, and why? Agencies that have only wins in their portfolio are either selective or new.
- Who will actually do the work? The person pitching, a junior, or a subcontractor? Ask for names and roles.
- What have you stopped recommending since AI Overviews arrived? A candid answer names tactics that stopped helping. A blank look suggests the playbook has not changed.
Then speak to a reference yourself. Ask for one current client and one who left, because the one who left will tell you what the exit felt like. Here is a short script for the call.
Reference call: seven questions, ten minutes
1. What did the agency agree to do in writing, and did they do it?
2. How often did you receive a report, and could you read it without help?
3. Did you ever ask for a change to be explained? How did they respond?
4. Which accounts (Search Console, analytics, business profile) are in your name?
5. What was the first measurable change, and how long did it take to appear?
6. Was there anything you were surprised to be charged for?
7. If you left today, what would you take with you?A kitchen fitter calling the references of an agency that mainly serves large online retailers will learn something too: the agency's playbook may be built around thousands of product pages rather than a dozen service pages and a gallery. Ask whether they have worked on a service business with a site this small.
The Complete Excel Course with AI Integration
From formulas and pivot tables to Power Query, DAX, VBA and AI with Copilot, ChatGPT and Claude — hands-on from the first lesson.
By Sagnik Bhattacharya and Virginia Thorn, Primetime Emmy Award winner
Buy nowReporting: what a monthly report must contain
A good report separates what Google tells you from what a tool estimates, and says which is which. Each line below has a source you can open yourself.
| Measure | Where it comes from | Why it belongs in the report |
|---|---|---|
| Clicks, impressions and average position by page group | Search Console Performance report, Web search type | Google says traffic from AI Overviews and AI Mode is included in this report |
| Impressions in generative AI features by page, country, device and date | Search Console Generative AI performance report | Google rolled it out to all sites by 31 August 2026; at launch it listed impressions, not clicks |
| Pages indexed and errors found or fixed | Search Console indexing reports | A page that is not indexed cannot appear in any Google result |
| Enquiries, calls and orders from organic search | Your analytics goals and call tracking | Rankings are a means; enquiries are the point |
| Business profile calls and direction requests | Google Business Profile | Often the biggest local result, and invisible in web reports |
| Sample rankings or AI mentions | A third-party tracker, labelled as a sample | Useful for direction, but it is not Google's data |
| Work log | The agency's own record | Links every change to a date so you can judge cause |
Here is a filled-in summary, with illustrative figures, of the kind of one-page report a kitchen fitter should expect. Clicks from web search rose from 412 to 468 (up 14 per cent) and impressions from 14,200 to 17,900 (up 26 per cent). The new generative AI report showed 1,150 impressions, 70 per cent of them on three project pages. Enquiry forms from organic search went from 9 to 12, and Business Profile calls from 31 to 34. Work shipped: six service pages rewritten with real project photos, 14 broken internal links fixed, and two duplicate pages merged. In the same month last year, clicks rose 9 per cent on the month before, so about five points of this year's rise is more than the season explains. That comparison with last year is the line most reports leave out, and it is what separates the agency's effect from the calendar's.
Testing AI Overview and AI Mode claims
Only some of what agencies report about AI features can be measured. Google's report shows how often your pages appeared in AI Overviews and AI Mode, by page, country, device and date. Anything further, such as which answer cited you for which prompt, comes from third-party tools that sample prompts. That is useful, provided the agency can explain the sampling. For tool choices, the series has a guide to AI Overviews tracking software for a local business and one on what agencies can report from Search Console.
Ask five things about any visibility score. How many prompts does it track, and who chose them? How often are they run, and on which device and location settings? Does a mention count the same as a citation with a link? Is the result averaged or a single snapshot, given that answers vary by person and day? Can you see the raw prompts and answers behind the score? If the answers are "proprietary", the score is a number without a method.
You can also test the claims yourself in half an hour before signing. Write 20 questions your customers genuinely ask, run them on a screen share with the agency, and record what appears. Repeat monthly on the same sheet. This is a filled-in sample with illustrative entries.
| Customer question | AI Overview shown? | Our page cited? | Who was cited instead |
|---|---|---|---|
| How much does a fitted kitchen cost? | Yes | No | A cost guide and a manufacturer page |
| Shaker or slab doors for a small kitchen? | Yes | Yes | Our design article, plus a magazine |
| How long does a kitchen fit take? | Yes | No | Two trade forums |
| What should be on a kitchen quote? | No | Not applicable | Not applicable |
| Best worktop thickness for a breakfast bar? | Yes | Yes | Our FAQ page |
Two of five cited and one question with no overview at all is an honest baseline. If an agency's "visibility score" says 80 per cent while your own sheet says 40 per cent, the difference is your first question.
Access and ownership: who holds the keys
Google's advice on audits is specific: when an SEO offers one, grant only read access to Search Console at that stage, and do not give write access yet. The principle extends to every account the agency touches. The business should own everything, and the agency should be a named, removable user.
| Account | Who should own it | Agency access to start with |
|---|---|---|
| Search Console | You, as owner | Read-only during the audit, then restricted or full only if a task needs it |
| Analytics and tag manager | You | Viewer first, editor when a named task needs it |
| Business Profile | You, as primary owner | Manager role for the named person |
| Domain registrar and DNS | You | None. Make changes with them on a call if needed |
| Website admin or hosting | You | A named login, never a shared password; any server access comes with an explanation of each change |
| Reporting dashboards | Agency-built, but exportable | You hold an export of the data every month |
One more check comes straight from Google's guide. It says a site must be included in Search generative AI features in Search Console to be eligible to appear in them. Ask an owner-level user to confirm the status for your property, and tell the agency in writing not to change it without your approval.
Contract terms to read twice
Google reminds site owners that they are ultimately responsible for the actions of any company they hire, and that deceptive work done in your name could get a site removed from the index. That makes the contract part of your risk management, not just your budget.
| Clause | What good looks like | Walk away if |
|---|---|---|
| Term and notice | An initial three months, then monthly with 30 days' notice | A 12-month minimum with no exit if work is not delivered |
| Scope | A list of named deliverables each month: pages, fixes, reports | "SEO services" with no list |
| Guarantees | None on rank or AI inclusion; payment tied to delivered work | A guaranteed number one, guaranteed AI placement, or a "special relationship" with Google |
| Content | You own all of it; human review stated; AI use disclosed | The agency keeps the copyright or reuses it for others; bulk AI pages |
| Links and mentions | Methods listed; no paid links for ranking | "We have a network" and no detail |
| Subcontractors | Named, bound by the same confidentiality | Undisclosed outsourcing |
| Reporting | Monthly, with a work log and raw data access | A proprietary dashboard that you cannot export |
| Accounts | All in your name, agency users removable | Agency-owned accounts |
| Clean-up | The agency fixes, at its own cost, any action that triggers a penalty | No responsibility for harm |
| Price | Fixed for the term | Automatic increases |
Red flags that show up on the first call
- Cold outreach claiming you are missing from search engines. Google's page on hiring an SEO calls these emails out directly and advises giving them the scepticism you would give a "burn fat at night" diet pill.
- Guarantees, a "priority submit" to Google or a special relationship with it. Google tells owners to beware of all three.
- A Google Partner badge offered as SEO proof. Google describes the programme as designed for agencies that manage Google Ads accounts.
- Secrecy about methods or tools. If they will not explain what they intend to do, Google's advice is to be careful.
- A request for full access before any audit. Start read-only.
- A link to the agency in your footer. Google says you should never have to link to an SEO.
- llms.txt, chunking and "AI-friendly rewrites" as the headline offer. The earlier table shows what Google says about each.
- A visibility score with no method behind it.
- Case studies with no client name, dates or numbers.
- Pressure to sign this week. Nobody's ranking opportunity expires on Friday.
Google also notes that advertising with it has no effect on your organic presence, that it never accepts money to include or rank sites, and that appearing in organic results costs nothing. Anyone offering to pay Google for an organic place in AI Overviews is describing something Google says it does not sell. Paid advertising is a separate product. Google's page on hiring an SEO also says a small local business can probably do much of the work itself, which is a useful negotiating position: you are choosing help, not buying a necessity. The broader tutorial on choosing an SEO agency that understands AI search covers selection criteria beyond this checklist.
Send the questions in writing before the first call
Written answers are easier to compare and harder to wriggle out of. Send this to each agency on your shortlist and give them a week. How an agency responds to a plain list of questions tells you most of what the call will.
Subject: Questions before we talk
Hello [first name],
Before we arrange a call, could you answer these in writing?
1. Which two or three clients, similar to us, can you show in Search Console, with permission?
2. What would you change in our first 30 days, and in what order?
3. How will you report AI Overview and AI Mode visibility, and which parts come from Google's own reports?
4. Which accounts will be in our name, and what access do you need at each stage?
5. What is the minimum term, the notice period and the exit process?
6. Do any of your services involve llms.txt, bulk page creation or paid links? If so, why?
7. Who will do the work, and do you use subcontractors?
Thank you,
[your name]There is one more reason to ask in writing. Google says the best time to hire an SEO is often when you are about to redesign a site or launch a new one, because the structure can be made search-friendly from the start. If a redesign is not on the horizon and your site is small, a few months of doing the basics yourself, with the monthly SEO routine a small business can run itself, can show you what you would be paying for.
A scoring sheet for comparing three agencies
After the calls, score each agency from 1 to 5 on six criteria, multiply by the weight, add up, and divide by 5 to get a mark out of 100. The weights below put proof and alignment with Google's guidance first, because they are hardest to fake. Change them to suit you. Here is a filled-in sheet, with illustrative scores, for a kitchen fitter choosing between three agencies.
| Criterion | Weight | Agency A | Agency B | Agency C |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proof from similar sites | 25 | 4 | 3 | 5 |
| Advice matches Google's guidance | 20 | 5 | 2 | 4 |
| Reporting quality | 15 | 4 | 3 | 3 |
| Access and ownership | 15 | 5 | 2 | 4 |
| Contract flexibility | 15 | 3 | 2 | 4 |
| Communication and fit | 10 | 4 | 5 | 3 |
| Mark out of 100 | 100 | 84 | 54 | 80 |
Agency A's sum is (25 x 4 + 20 x 5 + 15 x 4 + 15 x 5 + 15 x 3 + 10 x 4) divided by 5, which is 420 divided by 5, or 84. Agency B was the friendliest on the phone but scored lowest because it leaned on llms.txt and wanted owner access on day one. Agency C had the strongest portfolio and a fair contract, so the 4-point gap to A is worth a conversation: ask C for read-only access during the audit and a clearer report sample, and the scores may change.
Ninety days: how to tell it is working
Google's advice is to ask what results an SEO expects and in what timeframe. A sensible answer sets checkpoints you can inspect rather than a promised ranking. Use these and write them into the statement of work.
| By day | What should exist | What to do if it does not |
|---|---|---|
| 30 | Read-only access agreed, an audit with a ranked fix list and named owners, and a baseline report with your starting clicks, impressions and enquiries | Ask for a revised audit; if there is no baseline, you cannot measure anything later |
| 60 | The top fixes live and re-indexed, an agreed content plan, and a work log you can read | This is the exit checkpoint: if nothing has shipped, invoke the notice clause |
| 90 | A rising impressions trend on target pages, early movement in AI feature impressions in Search Console, and no unexplained changes | Review scope with the agency; enquiries often lag impressions, so judge leading signals first |
Notice what is missing: any promise about a ranking. Impressions and indexed pages usually move before clicks do, and clicks before enquiries. If an agency wants to be judged only on a vague "visibility" measure at month three, it is asking you to accept a number you cannot verify.
Questions owners ask when hiring an AI SEO agency
Can an agency guarantee a place in AI Overviews?
No. Google says nobody can guarantee a number one ranking, and the same logic covers AI features: a page must be indexed and eligible to show with a snippet, and Google does not promise to serve any page. Treat a guarantee as a reason to walk away, and ask instead which fixes the agency will make and how they will be measured.
Does blocking Google-Extended remove me from AI Overviews?
Google says Google-Extended does not affect a site's inclusion in Google Search and is not a ranking signal. It governs whether content may be used for Gemini training and grounding in Gemini apps. Search features use separate snippet controls such as nosnippet and max-snippet, so ask an agency which control it wants to change and why.
Is a Google Partner badge proof of SEO skill?
No. Google describes its Partners programme as designed for advertising agencies and third parties that manage Google Ads accounts, and the page does not mention organic search. A badge may show paid-search competence but says nothing about SEO. Google also says it does not evaluate third-party SEO services, so be wary of claims of approval.
Do I need llms.txt or special markup?
Google's guide says no. You do not need AI text files, new markup or Markdown to appear in Google Search, including its generative AI features, because Search does not use them, and no special schema.org markup is required. It is fine to publish an llms.txt file for other services, but it neither helps nor harms your Google visibility.
How long before an AI SEO agency shows results?
No honest agency can promise a date, and Google's own advice is to ask what results they expect, in what timeframe and how they measure success. A reasonable 90-day plan shows shipped fixes and a rising impressions trend on target pages, with enquiries following later. If nothing has shipped by day 60, use your exit clause.
Further reads
- Best AI SEO Agency for Hotels? Questions to Ask Before You Sign — The same questions applied to a hotel's booking-led site.
- AI SEO for Roofers: Hire an Agency or Do It Yourself? — When an agency is worth it and when to do it yourself.
- How AI Overviews Are Changing Local Search for Small Businesses — How AI Overviews change what local searchers see.
- What AI Can and Can't Do for Your Local SEO — What AI can and cannot do for local SEO.
- How to Improve AI SEO: Getting Your Firm Cited in AI Answers — What improves your odds of being cited in AI answers.
- SEO for AI Search: A Client Audit Checklist for Agencies — The audit an agency should run on your site first.
- AI Keyword Clustering for SEO Agencies: Validate Clusters Before Sign-Off — Embed or prompt-cluster a keyword list, validate a sample against search results, and send the client a map they can approve, with costs per 10,000 keywords.
- ChatGPT for SEO: A Quality Gate for Keyword Clusters and Briefs — The gate a ChatGPT keyword cluster, brief or meta description must pass before a client sees it, with Search Console checks and where the model invents data.
- PR for AI Search: How Agencies Earn Citations in ChatGPT Answers — A citation test you can run this week, the coverage types worth pitching, a tracking sheet, client reporting wording and claims to avoid.
- AI Tools and AI Development: The Complete 2026 Guide — the AI hub, including every tutorial in the AI-for-business series.
Sources: Google Search Central pages on hiring an SEO, on optimising for generative AI features, on AI features and your website, and on third-party SEO advice; Google's spam policies and crawler documentation; the Search Central post introducing Search Generative AI performance reports (3 June 2026); Google's Partners programme page.