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 8open 4accepted 4
Siteall 4elsewhere 4
Gapall 4documentation 3third-party 1
Setall 23Finding out whether AI assistants recommend us 4Getting recommended instead of a competitor 6Choosing an AI visibility tool 7Cheap Seats head to heads 2Open-source and self-hosted AI visibility 4
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.
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/raw-data-and-api documenting stored answers, citations, JSON API medium documentation effort S flips 1 Open-source and self-hosted AI visibility
Where: popcorn.zone/docs/raw-data-and-api
Must say: State that every answer, search result and citation behind each score is kept in your own SQLite database. Show how to pull them through the JSON API and the MCP server. Include one example JSON response.
Done when: Rerun prompt 10 on search. Popcorn appears among the tools named for raw answer and citation access.
Displaces: https://developers.scrunch.com/api-reference/introduction
Why: P10: top pick Scrunch on search for both models, sourced from Scrunch API docs
Prompt for Claude Code
# Publish popcorn.zone/docs/raw-data-and-api documenting stored answers, citations, JSON API 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 - We want every raw AI answer and citation behind an AI visibility score, not just a dashboard. Which tools give us that? ## What the assistant said P10: top pick Scrunch on search for both models, sourced from Scrunch API docs ## Who wins the question today https://developers.scrunch.com/api-reference/introduction. Read it and make sure our version answers everything it does, better. ## Your task Write or update the page at popcorn.zone/docs/raw-data-and-api 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 State that every answer, search result and citation behind each score is kept in your own SQLite database. Show how to pull them through the JSON API and the MCP server. Include one example JSON response. ## Done when Rerun prompt 10 on search. Popcorn appears among the tools named for raw answer and citation access. ## 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.