Where five AI engines cite us — and where they don't.
Snapshot 2026-06-13 · 6 queries × 5 engines · run with our own AI SEO Kit · re-run monthly
Across the four category queries — “best AI agent skills marketplace,” “tools to audit a site for AI SEO,” and two more — on all five engines, Solid State was named zero times. Every citation we earned came on a query that already contained our name. We ran this on ourselves. We publish it because the kit's whole promise is no fake numbers.
| Engine | Verdict | Cited / tested | Best strength |
|---|---|---|---|
| ChatGPT search | PARTIAL | 1 / 6 | CITED |
| Perplexity | PARTIAL | 2 / 6 | CITED |
| Google AI Overviews | PARTIAL | 2 / 6 | CITED |
| Claude search | PARTIAL | 1 / 6 | CITED |
| Copilot | PARTIAL | 2 / 6 | CITED |
No engine recommended Solid State for a job. The strongest result anywhere was CITED — and only on navigational queries.
| Query type | Example | Engines citing us |
|---|---|---|
| Discovery | “best AI agent skills marketplace” | 0 of 5 |
| Discovery | “tools to audit a site for AI SEO” | 0 of 5 |
| Navigational | “Solid State skills marketplace” | 4 of 5 |
| Navigational | “solidstate.cc” | 5 of 5 |
Discovery, not retrieval.
The engines pull discovery answers from third-party roundups — kdnuggets, agensi.io, presenc.ai, awesome-agent-skills. Competitors named there get cited; we're in none of them. Retrieval already works: Perplexity quoted “packaged judgment,” Copilot quoted “one install, three channels, no lock-in,” Claude read our live catalog exactly. Once an engine reaches the site, it parses it correctly. The gap is being named in the sources engines trust — not the site itself.
This scorecard is the output of one skill in the kit — ai-visibility-check. Same run, any site.
See the AI SEO Kit →Method: 6 queries × 5 engines, run 2026-06-13, scored from full transcripts including sources. Cells without transcripts are UNTESTED — none here. Nothing inferred. Citation shares move weekly; this is a dated snapshot, not a promise.