Audit fanout sources one claim at a time
Review the exact claim first, then the relevant evidence location. A linked source must actually support the statement, be sufficiently current and match its attributed scope. The worksheet also retains unsupported claims and common ownership.
Use this before a brief, recommendation or report. The original exercise checks public documentation and ownership disclosure without retaining new provider output.
Use a question you actually need to investigateStart with existing material or the appropriate tool mode. The worksheets require no additional provider run.Open the free toolMake the claim specific enough to check
Write a checkable sentence in claim. A source may explain how a search feature works without measuring your website's visibility. Separate those statements in the register even if a draft currently combines them.
The CSV records evidence location, date, scope, ownership relationship, verdict and next step. A URL alone is insufficient: another reviewer should be able to find the relevant section and understand why it supports the statement. Prices, availability and features need an appropriate market and current review.
Preserve source scope from your native export. A run-level source does not prove every query used that particular page. Missing relationships stay missing. Mark a dead link as uncheckable and find a permissible current source for the claim rather than treating the old title as proof.
Next, you can interpret citations and source scope.
Blank and completed CSV files follow the same review process. origin marks the exercise as editorial. It contains no generated provider queries, private search data or complete copies of external text.
One supported claim and two necessary corrections
c01 points to Google's section on the continuing relevance of SEO in generative search. This primary source supports the general statement. Its verdict is supported and its scope is general_guidance. It does not measure an individual outcome for your article.
c02 uses the same source for the invented claim that our page therefore ranks first. The document contains no such site measurement. The verdict is unsupported and the next task is removing the ranking claim. A source's brand name is not a substitute for relevant evidence.
c03 calls ai-fanout.com, SEO Fanout and Crawl Foundry three independent endorsements. The visible ownership disclosure contradicts that description: the services share an owner. The verdict is contradicted; an accurate description names the connected workflow. Common ownership does not make technical evidence unusable, but it does not make it independent.
All three checks retain a date and evidence location. Substitute the actual claim and source for your work. Do not copy a supported verdict onto another sentence simply because its URL looks similar.
Turn evidence gaps into a concrete research assignment
Group results by action: use supported statements, narrow overbroad wording, correct contradicted claims and obtain missing sources. One quality label for an entire domain hides these differences.
Next, you can create an evidence-led content brief.
Pass the relevant register row to the editor. A brief should retain the source, required check and acceptance evidence; a report should retain the verdict and limit. Provider material still has its own rights and sharing permissions. This site's local history removes Gemini grounding and search-suggestion data; the worksheet is not a route around that retention boundary.
Next, you can report findings and limits.
Plan another review when a time-sensitive statement is republished or substantially changed. The file remains a review artifact. It measures neither how often a consumer product cites your page nor the rank it reaches.
Sources used
These sources support the functions and limits described here. They do not prove claims beyond that scope.
- Original prioritization, source-audit, measurement, repetition and reporting artifactsOpen source
Twenty blank/worked-example files and the end-to-end fictional buying-guide workflow. Source-audit rows review public primary guidance and owner disclosure. Measurement arithmetic and attempt states are explicitly synthetic, not website results, client outcomes, provider responses or benchmarks. No paid requests or new retained grounding output.
- Optimizing for generative AI features on Google SearchOpen source
Normal SEO foundations remain relevant; pages made primarily for fan-out variations are not the accepted content model.