ChatGPT visibility: review source support and business identity

Use a dated source review

Choose a relevant buyer task and record the exact question, language, platform and time. Save the answer and every cited URL needed to inspect its claims. Identify whether Gavek or another brand is named accurately; do not treat a similarly named business as a successful mention. Retain missing and ambiguous outcomes alongside favourable examples.

Inspect support claim by claim

Open the cited source and check whether it supports the adjacent statement, concerns the right entity and preserves material conditions. A citation can refer to a third-party source; a business name can appear without a link. Mark unsupported claims as such. Compare the source with approved current business facts before recommending changes or claiming a platform has made an error.

Test access for the right purpose

OpenAI documents OAI-SearchBot for search, GPTBot for training and ChatGPT-User for certain user actions. Their roles and controls differ. A simulated request with a user-agent header is useful diagnostic evidence but not proof of a real OpenAI visit. Keep search eligibility distinct from an observed answer, and respect the business’s separate training preference.

Choose a proportionate action

Correct the official owner page if it contains an error; investigate stale third-party information if that is the source. Improve an important missing explanation when the buyer task warrants it. Retest later with the same method. Do not claim that repeated prompting retrains ChatGPT or that a website change guarantees recommendation.

Continue with the related decision

• AEO learning paths
• Google AI Overviews and AI Mode: eligibility, evidence and measurement
• Discuss the scope of AEO and AI-search work