Quick wins
The fix lists from the latest run of every prompt set, core sets first, then fastest expected ranking gain: prompts a fix could flip per working day, each weighted by what it has left to win (one minus its recommended rate over the last two weeks; named, for an info prompt). Mark a fix with the commit or pull request you submitted for it; open leaves out the ones you have. A later fix for the same page stays open, with what was tried before.
Statusall 15open 8accepted 7
Priorityall 23urgent 2high 8medium 11low 2
Siteall 9github.com/cheapseatsdev/cheapseats (code) 1elsewhere 8
Gapall 8documentation 4third-party 4
Setall 8Getting recommended instead of a competitor 2Choosing an AI visibility tool 2Cheap Seats head to heads 1Open-source and self-hosted AI visibility 3
Get Popcorn listed in frase.io's 10 best AI visibility tools roundup high third-party effort M flips 6 Getting recommended instead of a competitor
Where: https://frase.io/blog/the-10-best-ai-visibility-tools-in-2026
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.
Displaces: https://frase.io/blog/the-10-best-ai-visibility-tools-in-2026
Why: 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.
Prompt for Claude Code
# 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 high documentation effort M flips 4 Getting recommended instead of a competitor
Where: popcorn.zone/docs/guides/why-ai-recommends-a-competitor
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.
Displaces: https://everything-pr.com/why-chatgpt-recommends-competitors
Why: P2: no Popcorn page surfaced; answers were built from everything-pr.com/why-chatgpt-recommends-competitors and help.otterly.ai.
Prompt for Claude Code
# 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.
Get Popcorn listed on openalternative.co AI visibility tracking category high third-party effort S flips 3 Open-source and self-hosted AI visibility
Where: https://openalternative.co/categories/ai-visibility-tracking
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.
Displaces: https://openalternative.co/categories/ai-visibility-tracking/using/drizzleorm
Why: P1: shaped by openalternative.co/categories/ai-visibility-tracking; Popcorn was at position 17
Prompt for Claude Code
# 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 Cheap Seats listed on openalternative.co AI visibility tracking category high third-party effort S flips 2 Cheap Seats head to heads
Where: https://openalternative.co/categories/ai-visibility-tracking
Must say: P6's open-source search answer drew on openalternative.co and GitHub topic pages, and Aperture won the 'identifiable MIT alternative' slot. Submit Cheap Seats as an open-source alternative to Profound, Peec AI and Otterly in the AI visibility tracking category. The listing should say: MIT license, single Docker container, SQLite, Claude and OpenAI coverage, and a ranked fix list.
Done when: Cheap Seats is listed on openalternative.co, and on a re-run of P6, no search answer says it "couldn't identify a matching AI visibility project".
Displaces: https://github.com/anyin-ai/aperture
Why: "couldn't identify a matching AI visibility project"; steered to "self-hosted Aperture" (P6, codex-sol search)
Prompt for Claude Code
# Get Cheap Seats 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 - 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 "couldn't identify a matching AI visibility project"; steered to "self-hosted Aperture" (P6, codex-sol search) ## Who wins the question today https://github.com/anyin-ai/aperture. 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 P6's open-source search answer drew on openalternative.co and GitHub topic pages, and Aperture won the 'identifiable MIT alternative' slot. Submit Cheap Seats as an open-source alternative to Profound, Peec AI and Otterly in the AI visibility tracking category. The listing should say: MIT license, single Docker container, SQLite, Claude and OpenAI coverage, and a ranked fix list. ## Done when Cheap Seats is listed on openalternative.co, and on a re-run of P6, no search answer says it "couldn't identify a matching AI visibility 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/blog/profound-alternatives with a feature and cost table incl. Popcorn high documentation effort M flips 5 Choosing an AI visibility tool
Where: popcorn.zone/blog/profound-alternatives
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.
Displaces: https://seranking.com/blog/profound-alternatives/
Why: P4 search: Popcorn absent, top pick Peec AI, shaped by seranking.com/blog/profound-alternatives and writesonic.com/blog/profound-alternatives.
Prompt for Claude Code
# 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 high documentation effort M flips 5 Open-source and self-hosted AI visibility
Where: popcorn.zone/blog/open-source-alternative-to-profound-and-peec-ai
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.
Displaces: https://www.elmohq.com/ai-visibility-tools/alternatives/profound
Why: P1: 'Popcorn is not evaluated against these criteria; it appears only as a repo listed under the topic'
Prompt for Claude Code
# 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/guides/dev-tools-ai-recommendations how-to guide high documentation effort M flips 4 Open-source and self-hosted AI visibility
Where: popcorn.zone/docs/guides/dev-tools-ai-recommendations
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.
Displaces: https://usesapient.com/blog/how-to-track-ai-recommendations-for-your-api
Why: P15: sources were usesapient.com and lightsage.com 'how-to-track-ai-recommendations-for-your-api'
Prompt for Claude Code
# 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.
Get Popcorn listed on backlinko, deepsmith and sitepoint AI tracker roundups high third-party effort L flips 6 Choosing an AI visibility tool
Where: 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/
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.
Displaces: https://backlinko.com/llm-tracking-tools
Why: P12 search: top pick Amplitude AI Visibility, shaped by backlinko.com/llm-tracking-tools and sitepoint.com/best-llm-visibility-trackers.
Prompt for Claude Code
# 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.