Use AI for research and drafting, never for the decision to ask or for what you offer. For each prospect, have the assistant summarise what their page covers and where your client's asset adds something, draft a short email naming that gap, and send three messages at most. Offer no payment or goods for the link, and verify every claim.
Google's link-spam policy targets links made mainly to manipulate rankings: buying or selling links, excessive link swaps, automated link creation and optimised-anchor guest posts. Asking an editor to consider a genuinely useful page is not on that list. The line is crossed by what you offer in return, by what you ask the link to say, and by volume without value.
Where outreach crosses Google's line
The table sets Google's published examples of link spam beside the way each one appears in AI-assisted outreach, with the check to run before anything is sent. Google also says that buying and selling links is a normal part of the web, and that such links do not violate the policy when they are qualified with the nofollow or sponsored attribute, so the problem is undisclosed, ranking-driven exchange.
| Google's example (paraphrased) | How it appears in outreach | Check before sending |
|---|---|---|
| Buying or selling links, including swapping goods or services for them or sending a product in return for a write-up with a link | "Free sample if you link to us"; a paid "sponsored post, dofollow" | No incentive in any template. If you send samples, either ask for no link or ask for it to be qualified as sponsored |
| Excessive link exchanges ("link to me and I'll link to you") | Reciprocal-link templates; "I'll feature you on our resources page" | No reciprocity asks. A genuine mention happens for its own sake |
| Using automated programs or services to create links | Bots posting comments, forum signature or profile links at scale | AI drafts the email, a person sends it, nothing auto-posts anywhere |
| Optimised anchor text in articles, guest posts or press releases on other sites | Guest-post pitches that specify an anchor such as "best inventory software for wholesalers" | Never dictate anchors; let the editor choose the wording |
| Requiring a link in terms or a contract without letting the site qualify it | Partner agreements that demand followed links | Let the publisher qualify the link |
| Scaled content abuse, including using generative AI to produce many pages without adding value | Spinning hundreds of "linkable" pages or guest posts | Make each asset once, by a person, with original data or analysis; see the scaled content abuse checklist |
The asset has to deserve the link
No outreach routine rescues a weak page. The most reliable assets are the ones an editor would otherwise have to build: a calculator or template that works, a worked example with the arithmetic shown, original analysis from data the client actually holds, or a clear explanation of something their field gets wrong. Before any outreach starts, put the asset through five questions. Does it answer something the prospect's readers need and the prospect's page does not? Is every figure either sourced or computed in the open? Is it free to read, with no form in the way? Has someone with domain knowledge reviewed it? Does it show a date and say how it will be kept current?
If the answer to any is no, fix the page first. A re-skinned listicle or a batch of AI-generated pages will earn few links and, at scale, runs into Google's scaled-content rules. For the reorder-point client, the asset passes: the spreadsheet is usable offline, the worked example shows each step, and the page carries an update date.
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 nowProspect research: what the assistant does and what stays human
The main example client for this tutorial is illustrative: a B2B software reseller that sells inventory software to wholesale distributors. Its asset is a free guide on how wholesalers set reorder points, with a downloadable spreadsheet calculator. The agency's job is to find pages where that asset adds something missing, and to tell the editor so honestly. Research runs in four steps:
- A person sets the target criteria: topical fit, a real readership rather than a metric alone, visible editorial standards, and a page where the asset fills a gap.
- Pages are collected by hand or with tools whose terms allow it. Do not scrape profiles: LinkedIn's user agreement, for one, bans using crawlers, plugins or bots to scrape or copy profiles and other data.
- For each page, paste the visible text into the assistant, not just the URL, and ask for four things: a two-sentence summary, what the page lacks compared with the asset, one sentence copied exactly from the page that an email could refer to, and the last-updated date if the page shows one.
- A person verifies the output. The quoted sentence must exist on the page. The contact name and address must come from the site's own editorial or contact page. And the site must not be selling links: a page that advertises sponsored-post rates is dropped from the list.
A filled-in row of the research sheet, again illustrative, looks like this:
| Field | Entry |
|---|---|
| Page | [URL]: a guide to inventory management for distributors, last updated three years ago |
| Summary (assistant) | Explains why distributors hold safety stock and lists common stock-out causes |
| Gap (assistant) | Describes safety stock but gives no reorder-point formula or worked example |
| Quote to refer to | [sentence copied from the page] |
| Contact (human) | [name and role from the site's contact page]; editorial address |
| Checks (human) | Quote found on page; no sponsored-post rates; angle: fills a gap |
| Decision | Send step 1 |
Six angles that hold up
An angle is the honest reason the editor might want the link: something that makes their page better. Choose one per prospect and do not stack them. The assistant can suggest which one fits the page text, but only a person can confirm the facts behind it.
| Angle | The assistant's job | The human check |
|---|---|---|
| Fills a gap on a resource page | Compares page text with the asset and names what is missing | The gap is real and the asset fills it |
| Replaces a broken link | Drafts the note once the link is flagged | The link really is dead, tested in a browser, and the asset is a fair replacement |
| Updates an outdated figure or rule | Spots the dated statement in the page text | The newer source is current and correctly described |
| Reclaims an unlinked mention | Drafts a short, friendly request | The mention is of the client, in context, with no link |
| Offers an expert quote | Drafts the pitch from the editor's published request | The editor asked, and the named expert agrees to be quoted |
| Flags a factual error | Drafts a courteous correction with the source | It is an error, the source is primary, and the tone is not a demand |
The three-email sequence, with templates to adapt
Three messages is the whole campaign for a prospect: the first on day 0, a follow-up on day 4 or 5 that adds something new, and a closing note on day 10 to 12. Replies, positive or negative, stop the sequence at once. Every message carries the sender's name, the agency, the client, a postal address and a plain opt-out line, and the first one includes a short statement that no payment or exchange is involved. That statement is the spam-policy line: it tells the editor, and any later reader of the email, what the request is and is not.
Email 1 is the only one that sells the gap. It is about 100 words, refers to a sentence on the page, names the asset's specific contribution and makes saying no easy:
Subject: A reorder-point formula for your inventory guide
Hi [first name],
I read your guide to inventory management for distributors, in particular the section on safety stock. It explains why a buffer matters but stops before the formula, so readers cannot work out where to set their reorder point.
We have published a free guide with a worked reorder-point example and a downloadable spreadsheet: [URL]. If you think it would help your readers, it could sit alongside that section. If not, no problem at all. No payment or exchange is involved on either side.
[your name], [agency], writing for [client]
[postal address]
Not relevant? Reply "no thanks" and I will not write again.Email 2 must bring something that was not in email 1, otherwise it is only a nudge. Here the guide has gained a short section on seasonal demand, which the prospect's page mentions without covering. If nothing new exists, skip the second email and move to the third:
Subject: Re: A reorder-point formula for your inventory guide
Hi [first name],
One addition since my last note: the guide now includes a short section on adjusting the reorder point for seasonal demand, which your article mentions but does not cover. The link again: [URL].
If it is not a fit, a one-word reply is enough and I will leave it there.
[your name], [agency], writing for [client]
[postal address]
Reply "no thanks" to stop these.Email 3 closes the loop and asks for a pointer rather than a favour. It also leaves a good impression, which matters because the same editor may be useful for a different client next year:
Subject: Closing the loop on the reorder-point guide
Hi [first name],
I will not write again after this. If a colleague looks after your resources pages or the guide's updates, I would be grateful if you could point me to them. Otherwise, thank you for the guide, which was clear and useful.
[your name], [agency], writing for [client]
[postal address]
Reply "no thanks" and I will not contact you again.Four things never appear in any of the three: the words dofollow or anchor text, a deadline, an offer of payment, goods or a return link, and praise that cannot be checked against the page.
The angle prompt, a realistic output and the fixes
The prompt sets the rules the templates follow and gives the assistant a way out, so it does not write a persuasive email for a page that does not support one:
You draft one outreach email for a link-building campaign.
Inputs: the page text, our asset, and the angle chosen by a human.
Rules:
- Refer only to something that appears in the page text. Quote it exactly or do not mention it.
- Do not praise the site or author unless the praise is a specific, checkable fact from the page text.
- Do not offer or ask for payment, goods, services or a link exchange. Do not mention anchor text, follow attributes, rankings or SEO.
- 80 to 110 words, plain and polite. One clear sentence on what the asset adds. One easy way to say no.
- End with the sign-off and footer I give you.
- If the page text does not support the angle, reply NO ANGLE and say why.
Page text: [paste the visible text]
Asset: [one line and URL]
Angle: [fills a gap | replaces a broken link | updates a figure | reclaims a mention | expert quote | correction]
Footer: [name, agency, client, postal address, opt-out line]When the page text is missing and only the URL is supplied, the assistant writes from imagination. A typical result (illustrative) reads:
Hi [first name], I'm a huge fan of your work on inventory management and have been reading your site for years! Your recent guide ranked first on Google for "inventory for distributors", which is no surprise. We have an amazing new resource that would make a great addition. Would you link to it using the anchor "best inventory software for wholesalers"? Happy to return the favour with a link from our site!
Almost every sentence fails. The fandom is invented, the ranking claim is unverifiable and beside the point, "amazing" replaces a specific gap, the request dictates anchor text, the offer of a link in return is a link exchange in Google's terms, and there is no postal address or opt-out. The fix starts upstream: paste the page text, keep the NO ANGLE rule, and never let a draft leave the building without a person comparing each claim with the page. The edited version is email 1 above.
The pre-send checklist, ten questions
Print this and tick it for every first email, or paste it into the tracking sheet as ten columns. A single "no" holds the email back.
- Did we paste the page text rather than only the URL?
- Does the sentence quoted from the page exist on the page?
- Did the contact details come from the site's own editorial or contact page?
- Is the site free of advertised sponsored-post or link rates?
- Does the angle fit the page, and has a person confirmed the facts behind it?
- Is the email free of any payment, goods, services or link exchange?
- Is it free of anchor text, follow attributes, deadlines and ranking claims?
- Does the footer carry name, agency, client, postal address and an opt-out line?
- Is the recipient absent from the suppression list, with their type and address source recorded?
- Is this email step 1, 2 or 3 of the sequence, with no step 4?
Email-law checks: CAN-SPAM, PECR and personal data
Google's policy governs rankings; email law governs the message. Treat an email that asks for a link to a client's commercial page as a commercial email, because CAN-SPAM covers email that promotes content on commercial websites and makes no exception for business-to-business email. The regulator lists eight requirements, among them accurate sender and routing details, a subject line that matches the content, a clear label where the message is an ad, your postal address, a visible way to opt out, opt-outs honoured within 10 business days, and monitoring of anything sent for you; the opt-out mechanism must also keep working for at least 30 days after sending. Penalties run up to $53,088 per email.
The last requirement matters to agencies. Hiring another company to send does not transfer the responsibility, and both the company whose product is promoted and the company that sends may be held responsible. If your agency sends for a client, your outreach standards are the client's exposure as well.
| Recipient | Rule of thumb | What the footer needs |
|---|---|---|
| Any commercial email under CAN-SPAM | Accurate header and subject; clear label where it is an ad; opt-outs honoured within 10 business days, ideally the same day | Name, agency, client, postal address, opt-out line |
| Corporate bodies under PECR (companies, limited liability partnerships, government bodies) | No prior consent needed, but you must not hide your identity and must give a valid address for opt-outs; keep a do-not-email list of businesses that object | The same footer, with contact details that work |
| Sole traders and some partnerships under PECR | Treated as individuals: email only with their specific consent, or if they bought a similar product from you and were offered an opt-out | Do not cold email; use a contact form the site invites people to use |
| Named people, with recipients in the EU | Data-protection law such as the GDPR can apply to a named person's work email | A line on how to object, and a note of where each address came from |
The PECR rows follow the regulator's own guidance on electronic mail marketing, which also warns that data-protection law can apply when you email named employees at a company. Other markets set different rules, so take the list of markets you target to a qualified adviser. The point for the workflow is that the research sheet should record the recipient type and the source of every address, because the right footer and the right decision depend on both.
Sending infrastructure counts too. Google treats anyone sending close to 5,000 or more messages a day to personal Gmail accounts as a bulk sender, requires SPF, DKIM and DMARC authentication and one-click unsubscribe for their marketing mail, recommends honouring unsubscribes within 48 hours, and asks every sender to keep the spam rate reported in Postmaster Tools below 0.1% and never reach 0.3%. A small outreach team sends far fewer messages, but authenticating your domain and honouring unsubscribes promptly are sound practice at any volume, because complaints tend to damage deliverability for everything sent from the same domain. The tutorial on writing cold emails with AI that stay out of spam covers the deliverability side in more depth.
Reply tracking, suppression and the weekly numbers
A tracking sheet is the compliance control as much as the reporting tool. One row per prospect and client holds the status (researched, step 1 sent, step 2 sent, step 3 sent, replied, declined, opted out, bounced, link live), the dates, the recipient type, the source of the address and the angle used. Two rules govern it. An opt-out or a decline goes onto a suppression list the same day, and that list is shared across every client the agency serves, so nobody is written to again by a different campaign. And a decline is a final answer: that prospect hears from the agency again only when a client's asset has changed materially.
When a link goes live, record the URL, the anchor text, the attribute (followed, nofollow or sponsored) and the date checked, and look again two weeks later. The attribute is information, not a failure: an editor who adds nofollow has still published something useful.
Here is one illustrative month for the reorder-point client. The agency researched 60 prospects, and 38 passed the checks and received email 1. Of those, 33 had not replied and received email 2, and 30 received email 3. Nine people replied across the three steps: 4 agreed to link, 3 declined and 2 opted out. Four links went live, and both opt-outs were on the suppression list the same day. The human time was 15.0 hours of research (15 minutes per prospect), 7.6 hours of review and editing (12 minutes per first email) and about 2.4 hours on replies and tracking, which is 25 hours for four links, or roughly six hours per live link. These figures are invented to show the arithmetic. Your own tracking sheet will say whether the cost per link is acceptable, and whether the effort belongs in outreach at all or in making a better asset.
Five replies you will get, and what to send back
| Reply (illustrative) | What it means | What to send |
|---|---|---|
| "Sure, send me the link again." | A positive reply | The URL and one sentence on what the asset covers, with thanks. No anchor requests. Stop the sequence |
| "We only link to non-commercial sources." | A policy decision | Thank them, mark the prospect declined, do not argue |
| "Could you write a guest post instead?" | A different request | A person decides whether the client wants to write for the site, unpaid, on the site's topic, with a neutral author bio and no optimised anchors |
| "How much will you pay?" | A pay-for-links offer | The decline reply in the next section |
| "Please remove me from your list." | An opt-out | Same day: add to the shared suppression list, confirm in one line, contact no further |
When the answer is "yes, for a fee" or "only if you link back"
Some replies will offer a paid placement or ask for a reciprocal link. Neither is a compliance disaster if you answer plainly, and both need a decision rule written down in advance, so that a junior does not improvise. For a paid offer, the reply is "Thank you for the offer. We do not pay for editorial links, so I will leave it there." If a client does want sponsored coverage, buy it openly, label it as sponsored on the page, and have the link qualified as Google describes. For a reciprocal request, the reply is "We don't swap links, but thank you for considering the guide." A link exchange is on Google's list, and an agency that agrees once will find the habit hard to stop.
Both replies are short on purpose. They take a minute to write, keep the relationship intact and leave a record in the sheet. The tutorial on which SEO jobs to hand to AI and which to keep human puts the principle in general terms: AI can speed up research, summaries and first drafts, but the decision to ask, the promise made and the facts stated stay with a person. If you want to see the same sequence applied to a different kind of pitch, the podcast guest outreach tutorial uses it for research, pitch and follow-up, and the tutorial on AI personalisation for B2B trade accounts shows how far personalisation can go before it turns into guesswork.
Questions agencies ask about AI link outreach
Can AI write the whole outreach email?
It can draft one, but a person should send nothing they have not checked. Assistants tend to invent flattering details about the prospect's page, so every claim about the prospect must match the page itself. Treat the draft as a starting point and own the final wording, because the agency's name is on the message.
Is sending a free product in return for a link against Google's policy?
Google's link-spam policy lists exchanging goods or services for links, including sending a product in return for a write-up that contains a link. Such links are not a violation when they are qualified with the sponsored or nofollow attribute. If you send samples, either do not ask for a link or say the link should be qualified.
How many follow-ups are too many?
Three emails in total is a sensible ceiling: the first, one follow-up that adds something new, and a closing note. A fourth message turns persistence into pressure and tends to raise spam complaints, which damage deliverability for everything sent from that domain. Stop at a clear no, and honour any opt-out the same day.
Does cold link outreach need consent under email law?
It depends on the recipient and the rules that apply to them. CAN-SPAM has no business-to-business exemption and requires accurate sender details, a postal address and an opt-out honoured within 10 business days. Rules such as PECR treat limited companies differently from sole traders, and data-protection law can apply to named people. Ask a qualified adviser about your markets.
Can I use AI to scrape contact details?
Avoid it. LinkedIn's user agreement bans using bots, crawlers or plugins to scrape or copy profiles, and Google's link-spam policy lists automated programs that create links as a violation. Use contact details published for editorial enquiries, and let the assistant summarise pages you collected by hand or with tools whose terms allow it.
Further reads
- AI Keyword Clustering for SEO Agencies: Validate Clusters Before Sign-Off — Choose the topics worth building linkable assets around.
- SEO Services AI: Drafting Monthly Client Reports With ChatGPT or Claude — Report links won and outreach results to clients clearly.
- AI Influencer Marketing for Agencies: Shortlist, Vet and Pitch — A parallel vet-and-pitch workflow for creator outreach.
- AI PR Pitch Emails: Personalise for Journalists With a Review Step — A five-step pitch workflow for small PR agencies: beat note, hook line, three-line pitch, manager sign-off and a follow-up cadence that stops on time.
- 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.
- Does llms.txt Work? What SEO Agencies Should Tell Clients — What Google says about llms.txt, what evidence exists elsewhere, and the exact wording an agency can give a client who asks for one.
- 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 spam policies and its page on qualifying outbound links, Google's email sender guidelines and sender FAQ, the CAN-SPAM compliance guide for business, the regulator's PECR guidance on electronic mail marketing, and LinkedIn's user agreement. Checked 4 November 2026.