Content

Content that answers the question without inventing anything about you.

Most AI writing tools will happily state that you have been in business for twenty years, serve four hundred clients, and won an award. If none of that is true, you have just published a liability. We only write what your knowledge base can support.

Ungrounded

Draft paragraph

With over 20 years of experience and more than 400 satisfied clients, our award-winning team delivers industry-leading results.

Four claims. None of them checkable.

Grounded

Draft paragraph

Cross-border employment contracts must satisfy the posting rules of the destination country. We advise on Italian and German postings; for other jurisdictions we work with local counsel.

Every claim traced to a knowledge-base entry.

How a draft is built

Four steps, and a human at the end of them.

01

Build the knowledge base

We crawl your site, take what you tell us directly, and turn it into discrete claims. Each one carries a confidence level and a source, so the system knows the difference between something you stated and something it inferred.

Artifact: claims with confidence and source


02

Find the questions worth answering

We work out what your buyers are actually asking answer engines, in their language, and drop the ones that only mention competitors or that you have no standing to answer.

Artifact: a ranked question map


03

Write it, grounded

The model commits to which knowledge-base claims it will use before it writes, then writes only from those. Anything it cannot support is left out rather than smoothed over. The finished HTML is sanitised before it goes anywhere near a browser.

Artifact: an article with traceable claims


04

Score it, then let a person decide

Each draft is scored against the rubric below and checked for grounding and valid schema. The score is advice. The decision to publish is always yours.

Artifact: a scored draft awaiting approval

The rubric

We publish the weights we actually score against.

10 factors, 100 points. This table is generated from the same configuration the scorer reads, so it cannot quietly drift from what we do.

AEO rubric · live weights100 pts
Direct answer opening 17 pts
Question intent match 15 pts
Structured format 14 pts
Metadata freshness 13 pts
Citation hooks 13 pts
Confidence grounding 9 pts
Entity coverage 7 pts
Internal linking 6 pts
Schema markup ready 5 pts
Conversational tone 1 pt

We demoted schema markup from 9 points to 5 after a matched study found no meaningful citation lift from adding it. It is still generated and validated, because it is hygiene — it is just not a lever. We also dropped multilingual consistency to zero for want of evidence.

What the research supports

Real effects, smaller than the industry claims.

Visibility lift, best methods

+40%

Citing sources, adding quotations and adding statistics improved visibility by 30–40% on a position-adjusted word-count metric.

Aggarwal et al., ACM SIGKDD 2024

Depends entirely on your rank

+115%

Citing sources lifted a page ranked fifth by 115%, and lowered a page already ranked first by 30%. The same tactic helps and harms.

Aggarwal et al., Table 2

Tactics that survived testing

3

Of 54 method-domain combinations benchmarked independently, only three produced a statistically significant ranking improvement. Most of this field is overclaimed.

Puerto et al., C-SEO Bench, NeurIPS 2025

Questions people actually ask

That is the failure mode the pipeline is built to prevent. Every factual statement has to trace back to a specific claim in your knowledge base, and each claim carries a confidence level. Where the knowledge base has nothing, the draft says so rather than filling the gap. Medium-confidence claims are hedged; low-confidence ones are flagged or dropped.

You do. Nothing publishes automatically. Drafts pass a pre-publication gate that checks grounding and schema validity, then wait for a human decision. A gate result is advice, not permission.

No, it is advisory. We used to treat it as an approval gate and that was the wrong call: a score is a proxy, and optimising a proxy is how you end up with content that scores well and reads badly. Grounding and drift checks are the hard gates.

Never. In the controlled study that established most of this field, keyword stuffing produced no benefit at all, and performed 10% worse than an unmodified baseline against live Perplexity. It is a tactic with a downside and no upside.

Whatever your plan covers, and it is written in that language rather than translated into it. Translated content reads like translated content, and answer engines are asked questions in the buyer's own words.

See what we could honestly say about you.

We build a knowledge base from your site first, so you can judge the grounding before anything gets written.

Free No card Two minutes GDPR

Talk to an AEO specialist

An Eniteo AEO specialist at work
Every account has a named strategist. You will know who reads your reports.