AI Visibility
measured23/100
Emerging · in Meeting Tools
counts brand mentions in AI answers, not source citations
AEO Readiness
fundamentals5/100
Weak fundamentals
Avg Prompt Score
9
across 320 prompts
AI Share of Voice
9%
across 320 prompts
Critical Issues
4
critical + high
How AI Visibility breaks down
in Meeting Tools
Composite = 50% coverage + 30% engine breadth + 20% position, measured in the brand's strongest category. Position and citation depth join the score once the aggregation pipeline captures them. This is the measured Visibility score — separate from AEO Readiness, which scores fundamentals.
Per-stage performance
Cited rate · share of voice · engine consensus · sentiment, broken out by buyer-journey stage. Sentiment is the net positive−negative skew across engines that cited the brand at this stage.
Categories Claap is visible in
2Executive summary
Claap is likely to be cited by AI engines for evaluation-stage queries because it has a first-party pricing page and multiple first-party comparison pages (e.g., Claap vs Gong). The single highest-ROI fix is to strengthen structured evaluation signals (SoftwareApplication + FAQPage for pricing/integrations/comparison queries) and ensure crawlable, tiered pricing content is fully indexable for AI crawlers—this directly improves citation eligibility for “{Brand} pricing” and “{Brand} vs {Competitor}” prompts.
Based on audit of claap.io · May 7, 2026