Quick wins

# Publish popcorn.zone/blog/prioritize-ai-visibility-fixes with an owner-by-fix-type table

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it explains the topic without naming us or citing our pages. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- How should we prioritize fixes to improve how AI assistants describe our product?
- What are the quickest wins for improving our brand's visibility in AI search?
- Who should own AI visibility work: SEO, content, product marketing or the docs team?

## What the assistant said
P18 claude-code-opus search: top pick SEO, shaped by guptadeepak.com/the-geo-org-chart-who-actually-owns-ai-visibility-in-2026.

## Who wins the question today
https://guptadeepak.com/the-geo-org-chart-who-actually-owns-ai-visibility-in-2026/. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at popcorn.zone/blog/prioritize-ai-visibility-fixes so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
Give a prioritisation method: rank fixes by prompts they could flip times how directly they address the stated reason for losing. Assign each fix to a site and an owner (docs, product marketing, SEO). Show that Popcorn's fix list carries exactly these fields, including owner.

## Done when
Prompt 16 or 18 on the search track cites this post.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Publish popcorn.zone/docs/guides/check-if-chatgpt-recommends-you with a 15-minute walkthrough

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- How can I find out whether ChatGPT recommends my product when people ask about my category?
- What tools track how often AI assistants like ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity and Gemini mention a brand?

## What the assistant said
P3 recall: top pick Peec AI. Search: top pick Otterly.AI. Codex cited help.openai.com/en/articles/8590148-memory-in-chatgpt.

## Who wins the question today
https://www.superlines.io/articles/best-chatgpt-tracking-tools. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at popcorn.zone/docs/guides/check-if-chatgpt-recommends-you so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
Write a step-by-step how-to. Write 10-20 buyer questions as a TOML prompt set, run docker, configure OpenAI (ChatGPT's provider) and Claude keys or the local Codex/Claude Code CLIs, and set a daily budget. Then read the recommended/mentioned/absent grade, position and top pick for each question. Show a sample graded answer and contrast it with checking by hand in ChatGPT, where memory and personalisation skew results.

## Done when
A re-run of prompt 3 cites this page or names Popcorn in at least one search answer.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Publish popcorn.zone/docs/guides/see-ai-search-results with CLI and UI steps

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- How can I find out why an AI assistant prefers a competitor's product over ours?
- How can I see the web search results an AI assistant gets for a question before it writes its answer, to understand why we're missing?

## What the assistant said
P13 codex-sol search: top pick Profound, sourced from tryprofound.com/blog/expanding-analysis-for-query-fanouts-in-profound.

## Who wins the question today
https://www.tryprofound.com/features/answer-engine-insights/query-fan-out. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at popcorn.zone/docs/guides/see-ai-search-results so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
Write a how-to on running a question on Popcorn's search track and opening the stored search results and citations the assistant used before it answered. Cover it in the web UI, CLI, JSON API and MCP server. Explain how comparing those results against the answer, the top pick and the objections raised shows why a competitor won.

## Done when
Prompt 13 on the search track cites popcorn.zone/docs and names Popcorn in at least 1 of 4 answers.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Publish popcorn.zone/docs/guides/prove-content-impact on daily runs and fix-to-prompt proof

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it explains the topic without naming us or citing our pages. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- How often should we re-check whether AI assistants recommend us, and how do we track changes over time?
- How do I prove to leadership whether our content work is changing what AI assistants recommend?

## What the assistant said
P14 claude search: top pick 'Otterly.AI'. Codex cited help.otterly.ai/monitoring-interval.

## Who wins the question today
https://help.otterly.ai/monitoring-interval. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at popcorn.zone/docs/guides/prove-content-impact so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
Explain how to re-check and report change. Set a daily run within a daily budget, watch the day-by-day share-of-voice rank and rates, and tie each shipped fix to the prompts it was meant to flip. Report those prompts before and after, with the stored answers and citations as proof. Include a sample leadership one-pager built from the fix list's 'prompts it should flip' field.

## Done when
A re-run of prompt 14 or 15 cites this page.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Get Popcorn listed in frase.io's 10 best AI visibility tools roundup

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a third-party gap: the roundups and comparisons the model reads leave us out.

## The questions it affects
- How can I find out why an AI assistant prefers a competitor's product over ours?
- ChatGPT gets our features and pricing wrong. How do we correct what AI assistants say about our product?
- What does an answer engine optimization content strategy look like for a B2B SaaS company?
- AI answers in our category keep citing Reddit threads, review sites and listicles that only mention our competitors. How do we get onto those sources?
- What are the quickest wins for improving our brand's visibility in AI search?
- Which AI visibility tools tell you what content to create or change, not just where you rank?

## What the assistant said
P20 claude-code-opus search sourced frase.io/blog/the-10-best-ai-visibility-tools-in-2026; the same page also shaped P3, P9, P12 and P17.

## Who wins the question today
https://frase.io/blog/the-10-best-ai-visibility-tools-in-2026. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
We need to be included on https://frase.io/blog/the-10-best-ai-visibility-tools-in-2026. Read that page first, work out the right way in (editor contact, submission form, PR, comments), and draft exactly what to send: a short, factual pitch covering the points below, in the page's own format.

## What it must say
Pitch Frase to add Popcorn as the open-source, self-hosted entry. It asks Claude and OpenAI models your buyer questions on search and recall tracks, grades recommended, mentioned or absent with share of voice, and builds a ranked fix list. Supply a one-paragraph blurb, a screenshot of a fix list and the GitHub link.

## Done when
The Frase article lists Popcorn, and prompt 20 or 2 on the search track names Popcorn.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Publish popcorn.zone/docs/guides/why-ai-recommends-a-competitor

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- ChatGPT keeps recommending our competitor instead of us. What can we actually do about it?
- How can I find out why an AI assistant prefers a competitor's product over ours?
- ChatGPT gets our features and pricing wrong. How do we correct what AI assistants say about our product?
- AI assistants mention our product but add caveats that steer buyers away. How do we address the objections they raise?

## What the assistant said
P2: no Popcorn page surfaced; answers were built from everything-pr.com/why-chatgpt-recommends-competitors and help.otterly.ai.

## Who wins the question today
https://everything-pr.com/why-chatgpt-recommends-competitors. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at popcorn.zone/docs/guides/why-ai-recommends-a-competitor so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
Explain the diagnosis loop step by step: ask your buyer questions repeatedly, and separate what the model finds by searching from what it believes with no tools. Then record the top pick, the products named and the objections raised, and trace the citations behind them. Show how Popcorn automates each step and turns objections into specific page fixes, using a sample graded answer as the example.

## Done when
Prompts 1, 2 or 4 on the search track cite this guide in at least 1 answer.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Publish popcorn.zone/docs/cli-and-ci with a scheduled CI workflow example

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- Can I run AI visibility checks from the command line or in a CI pipeline?
- Can I test the same buyer questions against several AI models and compare the answers?
- How can I automatically ask ChatGPT and Claude the same set of questions every week and track how their answers about my category change?

## What the assistant said
P9: 'says only that the Popcorn repo "also appears on that topic page", giving no reasons to use it'

## Who wins the question today
https://llmpulse.ai/features/cli. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at popcorn.zone/docs/cli-and-ci so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
Show the Popcorn CLI running a prompt set and exiting with the share-of-voice and recommended-rate results. Include a scheduled CI example that runs the set weekly; confirm the exact commands and the exit-code behaviour with engineering before publishing. State that the TOML prompt sets live in git and that changes go through pull requests, which LLM Pulse's hosted CLI does not offer.

## Done when
Rerun prompts 9 and 14 on search. Popcorn is recommended, not merely mentioned, in at least one answer, and this page is cited.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Publish popcorn.zone/docs/cost explaining AI visibility pricing drivers and Popcorn's cost

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- Otterly.AI or Peec AI for tracking AI search visibility on a tight budget?
- What's a cheap way to start measuring AI visibility for a small startup?
- How do AI visibility tools price their plans, and what drives the cost: prompts, models, brands or seats?

## What the assistant said
P13 search: shaped by otterly.ai/alternatives/pricing and get-ryze.ai pricing comparison.

## Who wins the question today
https://otterly.ai/alternatives/pricing/. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at popcorn.zone/docs/cost so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
Explain that hosted tools price by prompts, engines, brands and seats. Contrast that with Popcorn: no license fee (MIT), and cost is only your model API spend under a configurable daily budget, or $0 extra when run through the Claude Code and Codex subscriptions you already have. Add a worked example once the cost per run has been measured for a typical prompt set.

## Done when
Prompts 13 and 11 on the search track cite this page or name Popcorn in at least 1 answer each.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Get Popcorn listed on openalternative.co AI visibility tracking category

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a third-party gap: the roundups and comparisons the model reads leave us out.

## The questions it affects
- Are there open-source tools for measuring AI search visibility?
- Is there an open-source alternative to Profound or Peec AI?
- We want to track AI answer visibility without sending our data to another SaaS vendor. What are our options?

## What the assistant said
P1: shaped by openalternative.co/categories/ai-visibility-tracking; Popcorn was at position 17

## Who wins the question today
https://openalternative.co/categories/ai-visibility-tracking/using/drizzleorm. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
We need to be included on https://openalternative.co/categories/ai-visibility-tracking. Read that page first, work out the right way in (editor contact, submission form, PR, comments), and draft exactly what to send: a short, factual pitch covering the points below, in the page's own format.

## What it must say
Submit a Popcorn listing to this directory, which shaped the P1 answer. The listing should state: MIT licensed, a single Docker container, search and recall tracks, and a ranked fix list. Link the listing to the new comparison and self-hosting pages rather than only the repo.

## Done when
The Popcorn listing is live on openalternative.co, and a rerun of prompt 1 on search shows Popcorn at a position better than 17.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Get Popcorn listed on openalternative.co's AI visibility tracking category

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a third-party gap: the roundups and comparisons the model reads leave us out.

## The questions it affects
- Is Cheap Seats a good open-source alternative to paid AI visibility tools?
- What are the downsides of self-hosting Cheap Seats to measure AI search visibility?

## What the assistant said
P6: 'could not verify a public open-source project under this name... no official repository, license, or documentation found'.

## Who wins the question today
https://github.com/oneglanse/oneglanse. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
We need to be included on https://openalternative.co/categories/ai-visibility-tracking. Read that page first, work out the right way in (editor contact, submission form, PR, comments), and draft exactly what to send: a short, factual pitch covering the points below, in the page's own format.

## What it must say
Submit Popcorn to openalternative.co with this description: MIT license, self-hosted single Docker container, Claude/OpenAI tracking, link to github.com/metcalfc/popcorn. List it as an open-source alternative to Profound, Peec AI and Otterly. The searches surfaced OneGlanse because it was verifiably 'MIT licensed, self-hostable'; Popcorn needs the same verifiable listing on the page the assistant actually read.

## Done when
Popcorn is listed on openalternative.co/categories/ai-visibility-tracking and a re-run of prompt 6 search finds github.com/metcalfc/popcorn instead of saying 'no open-source project by this name found'.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Publish popcorn.zone/docs/self-hosting covering upkeep, costs, data flow and tradeoffs

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- Is Cheap Seats a good open-source alternative to paid AI visibility tools?
- What are the downsides of self-hosting Cheap Seats to measure AI search visibility?

## What the assistant said
P7: 'couldn't verify an official self-hosted AI visibility project under that name'.

## Who wins the question today
https://brandcitation.com/methodology. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at https://popcorn.zone/docs/self-hosting so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
Write an honest self-hosting page that answers the objections the assistants invented. Maintenance: one container plus a SQLite file, with upgrade steps. Costs: a daily budget cap on API calls, or local CLIs on existing subscriptions. API vs consumer answers: the search track forces web search and the recall track uses no tools. Trend discipline: daily share-of-voice rank with every answer and citation kept. Data control: prompts go only to the providers you configure.

## Done when
Re-running prompt 7 shows popcorn.zone/docs/self-hosting cited in at least one search answer, and no answer says it 'couldn't verify an official self-hosted project'.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Publish popcorn.zone/docs/costs with measured per-run spend and daily budget config

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- Cheap Seats vs Otterly.AI for a startup that wants to track AI visibility cheaply?
- What does it cost to run Cheap Seats every day, and how do I keep the spend under control?

## What the assistant said
P11 search cites docs.popcorn.co/getting-started/pricing-and-credits, a different product.

## Who wins the question today
https://docs.popcorn.co/getting-started/pricing-and-credits/. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at https://popcorn.zone/docs/costs so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
Explain that Popcorn the software is free (MIT) and the only running cost is model calls. Show how the daily budget caps API spend and how running through local Claude Code/Codex CLIs uses existing subscriptions. Publish a measured example first: the cost of one daily run of an 11-prompt set on both tracks for each configured model, measured before publishing.

## Done when
Re-running prompt 11 cites popcorn.zone/docs/costs instead of docs.popcorn.co or popcornai.art pricing.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Publish popcorn.zone/blog/profound-alternatives with a feature and cost table incl. Popcorn

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- What's the best AEO tool for a B2B SaaS company that wants to know if ChatGPT and Claude recommend it?
- What are good alternatives to Profound for tracking AI search visibility?
- Peec AI vs Profound: which is better for a mid-size marketing team?
- Otterly.AI or Peec AI for tracking AI search visibility on a tight budget?
- Is Gauge a good tool for tracking AI visibility, and what are the alternatives?

## What the assistant said
P4 search: Popcorn absent, top pick Peec AI, shaped by seranking.com/blog/profound-alternatives and writesonic.com/blog/profound-alternatives.

## Who wins the question today
https://seranking.com/blog/profound-alternatives/. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at popcorn.zone/blog/profound-alternatives so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
Name the paid tools buyers already compare: Profound, Peec AI, Otterly.AI, Scrunch, Gauge, Semrush AI Toolkit and Ahrefs Brand Radar. Add Popcorn as the open-source, self-hosted option: MIT licensed, one Docker container with SQLite, prompt sets as TOML in your own git repo, and Claude and OpenAI answers via API or your own Claude Code and Codex subscriptions. Include a feature table (search vs recall tracks, share of voice, objections, ranked fix list, API and MCP) and state honestly which engines Popcorn does not cover.

## Done when
Re-running prompts 4 and 7 on the search track names Popcorn or cites this page in at least 2 of 4 answers.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Publish popcorn.zone/blog/open-source-alternative-to-profound-and-peec-ai with feature table

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- Are there open-source tools for measuring AI search visibility?
- Is there an open-source alternative to Profound or Peec AI?
- We want to track AI answer visibility without sending our data to another SaaS vendor. What are our options?
- What's a good open-source way for a developer-tools startup to check whether AI assistants recommend it over alternatives?
- What's the cheapest way to track our brand in AI answers ourselves instead of paying for a SaaS subscription?

## What the assistant said
P1: 'Popcorn is not evaluated against these criteria; it appears only as a repo listed under the topic'

## Who wins the question today
https://www.elmohq.com/ai-visibility-tools/alternatives/profound. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at popcorn.zone/blog/open-source-alternative-to-profound-and-peec-ai so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
Publish this comparison under the exact query wording 'open-source alternative to Profound and Peec AI'. It must say Popcorn is MIT licensed, runs as one Docker container with SQLite, keeps prompt sets as TOML in your own git repo, and asks every question on both a search track and a recall track. Include a feature table against Elmo, Limelit, OneGlanse and Promptfoo, and only list competitor features that have been checked against their READMEs. This is needed because the pending GitHub-topics change gives assistants a repo name to list but no reasons to rank Popcorn.

## Done when
Rerun prompts 1, 2 and 11 on search. At least two search answers cite a popcorn.zone page and grade Popcorn as recommended.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Publish popcorn.zone/docs/models-keys-and-budget: own API keys, CLI subscriptions, daily cap

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- Should we build our own AI visibility tracker on the OpenAI and Anthropic APIs, or buy a tool?
- Which AI visibility tools let us use our own OpenAI and Anthropic API keys?
- How much does it cost in API fees to run our own AI visibility checks every day, and how do we cap it?
- What's the cheapest way to track our brand in AI answers ourselves instead of paying for a SaaS subscription?

## What the assistant said
P7: top picks were Lettertrace and an Apify actor; Popcorn was absent on all four answers

## Who wins the question today
https://www.producthunt.com/products/lettertrace. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at popcorn.zone/docs/models-keys-and-budget so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
Explain that Popcorn calls Claude and OpenAI through your own API keys, or through local Claude Code and Codex CLIs on your own subscriptions. Explain that a daily budget caps API spend. Include a worked cost example for N prompts × 2 tracks × M models per day, but measure real token and web-search costs from a Popcorn run before publishing any figures.

## Done when
Rerun prompts 7 and 8 on search. At least one answer cites this page and names Popcorn as supporting your own OpenAI and Anthropic keys with a spend cap.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Publish popcorn.zone/docs/guides/dev-tools-ai-recommendations how-to guide

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- What's a good open-source way for a developer-tools startup to check whether AI assistants recommend it over alternatives?
- How can a developer-tools company find out whether ChatGPT and Claude recommend it when developers ask which tool to use?
- How do we find out whether coding assistants recommend our library or API when developers ask how to do something?
- How do engineering-led companies measure whether LLMs recommend their product, without a marketing tool?

## What the assistant said
P15: sources were usesapient.com and lightsage.com 'how-to-track-ai-recommendations-for-your-api'

## Who wins the question today
https://usesapient.com/blog/how-to-track-ai-recommendations-for-your-api. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at popcorn.zone/docs/guides/dev-tools-ai-recommendations so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
Write a how-to for engineering-led teams: write the buyer questions developers actually ask as TOML, run them on the search and recall tracks against Claude and OpenAI, and read the share of voice and objections. Include a coding-assistant section for library and API questions. Use Popcorn's own prompt set as the worked example.

## Done when
Rerun prompts 12, 15 and 16 on search. At least one answer cites this guide.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Publish popcorn.zone/compare/peec-ai with a feature table, cost model and fit guidance

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- Cheap Seats or Peec AI for a small marketing team?
- Is Cheap Seats a good open-source alternative to paid AI visibility tools?
- Is Cheap Seats a good fit for an agency tracking AI visibility for many clients?

## What the assistant said
P2: Peec AI is 'a solid, proven pick for a small team' while Popcorn 'lacks reliable details'.

## Who wins the question today
https://peec.ai/pricing. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at https://popcorn.zone/compare/peec-ai so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
Add a feature-by-feature table against Peec AI. Popcorn side: MIT license and free software, single Docker container with SQLite, Claude and OpenAI coverage via API or local Claude Code/Codex CLIs, search and recall tracks, recommended/mentioned/absent grading with position and share of voice, and a ranked fix list naming the page, claim, owner and prompts to flip. Peec AI side: use its published plans from peec.ai/pricing. State plainly what a small team gives up: you host it yourself. For the agency question (P9), confirm and state how many brands or prompt sets one instance tracks before claiming multi-client support.

## Done when
On re-run of prompts 2 and 9, at least one search answer cites popcorn.zone/compare/peec-ai and no answer says it cannot tell which Popcorn is meant.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Publish popcorn.zone/compare/profound with a feature table and pick-this-if guidance

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- Cheap Seats vs Profound for tracking whether AI assistants recommend us: which should I pick?
- Is Cheap Seats a good open-source alternative to paid AI visibility tools?
- Is Cheap Seats a good fit for a developer-tools company checking whether ChatGPT and Claude recommend it?

## What the assistant said
P1: 'I can't give you an accurate feature-by-feature comparison, and I'd rather not invent one.'

## Who wins the question today
https://www.tryprofound.com/pricing. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at https://popcorn.zone/compare/profound so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
Say who should pick Profound: enterprise buyers who want a managed service. Say who should pick Popcorn: teams that want to own the data, keep every answer and citation, review TOML prompt sets by PR in git, and cap spend with a daily budget. Include a feature table covering engines, search vs recall tracks, grading, the fix list, and the API, MCP and CLI interfaces. Cite tryprofound.com/pricing for Profound's side.

## Done when
Re-running prompt 1 shows popcorn.zone/compare/profound among the cited pages, and no recall or search answer says it 'can't give an accurate feature-by-feature comparison'.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Publish popcorn.zone/compare/otterly-gauge-semrush with pricing and feature tables

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a documentation gap: the answer needed a page we don't have, or ours says the wrong thing.

## The questions it affects
- Cheap Seats vs Otterly.AI for a startup that wants to track AI visibility cheaply?
- How does Cheap Seats compare with Gauge for tracking and improving AI visibility?
- Cheap Seats or Semrush AI Toolkit for tracking our brand in ChatGPT and Claude?

## What the assistant said
P3: Otterly is 'the safer starting point'; Popcorn 'only worth choosing if its entry plan demonstrably covers that same set for less'.

## Who wins the question today
https://otterly.ai/pricing. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
Write or update the page at https://popcorn.zone/compare/otterly-gauge-semrush so it closes this gap. Find where pages like this live in the repo, match their structure, front matter and tone, and make the change there. If the page exists, edit it rather than starting over.

## What it must say
One page with three sections, each with its own H2 and anchor. Each section names the competitor's published entry price from its own pricing page; Popcorn's cost is its API spend under the daily budget, or $0 extra on existing Claude Code/Codex subscriptions (measure a typical run first). Each section shows Popcorn's differentiator: a ranked fix list, not only monitoring. For Semrush, state that Popcorn covers both Claude and ChatGPT/OpenAI models, since P5 flagged Claude coverage as unclear.

## Done when
Re-running prompts 3, 4 and 5 shows a popcorn.zone/compare URL cited in at least 2 of the 3 search answers.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.

# Get Popcorn listed on backlinko, deepsmith and sitepoint AI tracker roundups

When buyers ask an AI assistant the questions below, it doesn't recommend us, or recommends us for the wrong reasons. This is a third-party gap: the roundups and comparisons the model reads leave us out.

## The questions it affects
- How do generative engine optimization tools work, and which ones are worth paying for?
- What's the best AEO tool for a B2B SaaS company that wants to know if ChatGPT and Claude recommend it?
- Which AI visibility tools cover Claude, Gemini and Google AI Overviews, not just ChatGPT?
- What's a cheap way to start measuring AI visibility for a small startup?
- Is there a free AI visibility tracker that's actually useful?
- Which AI visibility tools can run on a schedule and alert us when we drop out of answers?

## What the assistant said
P12 search: top pick Amplitude AI Visibility, shaped by backlinko.com/llm-tracking-tools and sitepoint.com/best-llm-visibility-trackers.

## Who wins the question today
https://backlinko.com/llm-tracking-tools. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better.

## Your task
We need to be included on https://backlinko.com/llm-tracking-tools; https://deepsmith.ai/blog/best-budget-ai-visibility-trackers-startups; https://www.sitepoint.com/best-generative-engine-optimization-tools/. Read that page first, work out the right way in (editor contact, submission form, PR, comments), and draft exactly what to send: a short, factual pitch covering the points below, in the page's own format.

## What it must say
Pitch the editors to add Popcorn as the free, MIT-licensed, self-hosted entry. The facts to give them: one Docker container, SQLite, your own API keys capped by a daily budget, or your existing Claude Code and Codex subscriptions. The pending blog post (PR #7) only helps if crawlers find it, and these listicles are what the search track actually reads, so this covers a gap the post can't.

## Done when
At least 2 of the listed pages mention Popcorn, and prompts 11 and 12 on the search track name Popcorn at least once.

## Rules
- Don't invent numbers, benchmarks, prices, capabilities or customer names. Where a fact is needed and you can't find it in the repo or on our site, leave a clearly marked TODO saying exactly what to measure or who to ask.
- Answer the questions above directly and early on the page, in the words buyers use. AI assistants quote pages that state the answer plainly.
- Keep it scoped to this one fix. When you're done, summarise what you changed and list any TODOs.