When choosing an AEO or GEO service in India, look for a provider that starts with an audit of how AI systems can access and describe your business, explains what they will measure and how, connects the work to your existing SEO, and refuses to promise placements in ChatGPT or Google's AI Overviews. Avoid anyone whose main deliverable is a special file, "AI schema" or a proprietary score they cannot explain. A good provider sounds more like a careful SEO consultant than a salesperson.
I am Kavish Arora, a digital marketing consultant in Delhi NCR with 15+ years in the field. Answer engine optimisation (AEO) and generative engine optimisation (GEO) are now offered by almost every agency in India, and the quality varies a lot. This is a buyer's evaluation guide: a scorecard, the questions to ask, the claims to check against official documentation and what to watch for if you are an agency looking for a white-label partner. If you want to know what the work itself involves, I cover that in what AI search visibility services include.
First, be clear on what you are buying
Broadly, AEO is about making your content the clear, direct answer to specific questions, so search features and assistants can use it. GEO is about how generative AI systems describe and cite your brand across many sources, not just your own site. In practice the two overlap heavily with good SEO, and most providers sell them together. My AEO page explains how I separate them.
Before speaking to anyone, write down which outcome matters to you: being cited for specific buyer questions, being described accurately, getting more enquiries from AI-referred visitors, or simply knowing where you stand. That makes it far easier to judge proposals.
Check provider claims against official sources
Several claims I hear in sales pitches conflict with what the platforms themselves publish. As of October 2026, here is what the official documentation says. Check the linked platform pages for current details, because they change.
| Claim you may hear | What the platform says |
|---|---|
| "You need a special AI file or AI schema to appear in AI Overviews" | Google's guidance on AI features says there are no additional requirements or special optimisations needed, and that you do not need new machine-readable files, AI text files or special schema.org markup to appear in these features. |
| "Block GPTBot to protect your content; it will not affect ChatGPT" | OpenAI's crawler documentation separates GPTBot (training) from OAI-SearchBot (search). Sites opted out of OAI-SearchBot are not shown in ChatGPT search answers, so what you block matters. |
| "Blocking Google-Extended will hurt your Google rankings" | Google says Google-Extended controls whether content may be used for training Gemini models and does not affect inclusion in Google Search or act as a ranking signal. |
| "There is no way to see your Google AI visibility" | Search Console now has a generative AI performance report showing impressions in AI Overviews and AI Mode; Google says it was rolled out to all sites by 31 August 2026. |
| "We can guarantee you will be recommended by ChatGPT" | No platform offers site owners a way to secure placement in organic AI answers. Treat any guarantee as a red flag. |
A provider who gets these basics wrong is unlikely to get the subtler work right.
A scorecard for comparing AEO and GEO providers
Score each provider from 0 to 2 on each line. It keeps comparisons honest when proposals are written very differently.
| Criterion | Good sign (2) | Weak sign (0) |
|---|---|---|
| Starting point | An audit of access, content and current AI answers about you | A fixed package before seeing your site |
| Measurement | Explains platform reports, prompt sampling and how enquiries are tracked | A single proprietary score with no method shown |
| Link to SEO | Treats indexing, page quality and authority as the foundation | Presents AEO/GEO as separate from or replacing SEO |
| Content work | Rewrites key pages to answer real buyer questions clearly | Mass-produced FAQ pages or articles |
| Off-site presence | Accurate listings, genuine mentions, consistent business details | Bulk directory submissions or paid placements dressed up as "citations" |
| Honesty on limits | Says what cannot be controlled or guaranteed | Promises positions or timelines |
| Who does the work | Names the people and their experience | Vague "our team" |
| Reporting | Raw prompt results and platform data you can check | Screenshots of selected wins |
A provider scoring well on measurement and honesty but lower on polish is usually a better bet than the reverse.
Questions to ask on the first call
- What would you check first on our site, and why?
- How do you find out what ChatGPT, Gemini and Google's AI features currently say about us?
- Which numbers in your reports come from the platforms, and which from your own sampling?
- How many prompts do you track, how often, and how do you deal with answers varying?
- What changes would you make to our existing pages in the first month?
- How does this work fit with our current SEO? Who owns what?
- What is outside your control?
Listen for specifics. "We will optimise your content for AI" is not an answer; "your service pages do not say where you operate or who you serve, so assistants describe you vaguely" is. I explain measurement in more detail in how to measure AI search visibility.
Why SEO and AEO should not be bought separately
Many Indian businesses now have one vendor for SEO and another for "AI optimisation". This often causes conflict: one team rewrites pages for keywords, the other for answers, and nobody owns the outcome. Google's own guidance is that eligibility for its AI features follows normal Search eligibility, so the technical and content foundations are shared. If you do use two providers, define clearly who owns page content, technical changes and reporting, and ask them to share one measurement plan. My AEO and GEO checklist shows how much of the work overlaps.
If you are an agency looking for a white-label GEO partner
Agencies in India increasingly resell AEO and GEO services from specialist partners. The evaluation is different, because your reputation is on the line with clients who will never meet the partner. Check:
- Method transparency. Can they explain their audit and measurement method well enough that your account managers can defend it to a client?
- Report ownership. Are reports unbranded or white-labelled, and can you see the raw data behind them?
- Access and accounts. Clients' Search Console, Bing Webmaster Tools and analytics should stay in the client's ownership, with partner access granted, not the other way round.
- Confidentiality. A clear agreement on client data, non-solicitation and what happens when the arrangement ends.
- Claims discipline. If the partner promises placements, your agency will be the one explaining why it did not happen.
- Turnaround and communication. Who answers questions, how fast, and in which time zone.
Run a paid pilot on one client, ideally your own agency site, before committing others.
Red flags in proposals
- Guaranteed mentions in ChatGPT, Gemini or AI Overviews
- A deliverable list dominated by technical files and markup, with little content work
- Large volumes of auto-generated pages aimed at "AI questions"
- No plan to check whether what AI tools say about you is accurate
- Reporting that cannot be reproduced by you
- Lock-in contracts before any audit has been done
For comparing any marketing proposals side by side, my guide on how to compare digital marketing proposals has a fuller framework.
What it should cost
Pricing depends on the size of the site, how many services and locations you need covered, whether the provider also rewrites content and builds off-site presence, and how much ongoing measurement is included. A sensible order is an audit first, then a decision about ongoing work. For reference, my audit is ₹19,999 + GST, an audit with a prioritised roadmap is ₹49,999 + GST, and ongoing advisory sits within my monthly retainer of ₹75,000–₹1,50,000 + GST (10–25 hours). Execution by a team starts from ₹2,50,000 + GST.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between AEO and GEO services?
AEO focuses on making your content the clear answer to specific questions so search features and assistants can use it. GEO focuses on how generative AI systems describe and cite your brand across the web. Most good providers do both, built on solid SEO.
Do I need llms.txt or special schema for AI search?
For Google, no. Google's AI features guidance says you do not need new machine-readable files, AI text files or special schema to appear in AI Overviews or AI Mode. Normal structured data that matches your visible content is still fine. Be cautious of providers who make such files the centre of their offer.
Can an agency in India guarantee ChatGPT visibility?
No. No platform offers site owners a way to secure placement in organic AI answers. A provider can improve the clarity, accuracy and reach of your content, which makes citations more likely, but anyone guaranteeing placement is overpromising.
Should I hire one provider for SEO and AEO?
Usually yes, or at least one owner for strategy. The technical and content foundations are shared, and splitting them between two teams often leads to conflicting page changes. If you must use two providers, agree one measurement plan and clear ownership.
How do I evaluate a white-label GEO agency?
Check that their method and reports are transparent enough for you to defend to clients, that client accounts stay in client ownership, and that they avoid guarantees. Start with a paid pilot on one site before rolling the service out to others.
Want a second opinion on a proposal?
If you have AEO or GEO proposals in hand and want an independent read before signing, a 30-minute strategy session at ₹2,999 + GST is usually enough to spot the gaps. You are under no obligation to work with me afterwards.
