We build it. That's the difference.

Most GEO engagements end in a document. This one ends in merged pull requests.

Book a callCheck your AI visibility

A pull request, not a recommendation

  export default function ProductPage({ product }) {-   const { data } = useSWR(`/api/product/${id}`)-   if (!data) return <Spinner />+   // Rendered on the server: the crawler sees the copy+   const product = await getProduct(id)  +   <script type="application/ld+json">+     {JSON.stringify(productSchema(product))}+   </script>

The deliverable is a branch in your repository that your engineers review and merge, not a document describing one. Client-side fetching replaced with a server render the crawler can read, and the schema that makes the page an entity rather than a layout.

What lands in your repo

01 Why this exists

The backlog is where engagements die

Not a recommendation someone has to translate into code. A branch in your repo, in your review process, with your name on the merge.

An audit produces work: schema to write, pages to render server-side, templates to change, an information architecture to redraw. All of it is engineering, and all of it lands on a team that already has a roadmap.

So it queues. A quarter later the recommendations are still open, the retainer has produced documents, and everyone concludes GEO doesn't work. When what actually happened is that nothing was built.

We take that off the critical path. Our engineers work in your repository, against your review process, and the fixes ship on their own cadence rather than waiting for a slot in someone else's sprint.

02 Definition

What is Development for AI visibility?

Development for AI visibility
Development for AI visibility is the engineering work that makes a website legible to AI assistants: structured data, server-side rendering, template changes and information architecture, implemented in the site's own codebase. It exists because a GEO or AEO audit produces a backlog of engineering tasks, and those tasks compete for the same product roadmap as everything else a team is shipping.

  • From recommendation to pull request

    The deliverable is a branch your engineers review and merge, not a document describing one.

  • From your roadmap to ours

    The work leaves your team's critical path. Fixes ship on their own cadence instead of waiting for a sprint slot.

  • From a rebuild to a template change

    Most sites need markup, rendering and structure fixed rather than replaced. A rebuild is the most expensive way to solve a problem a template change covers.

03 What’s included

Four things land. All of them are built, not filed.

  • 01

    Fixes in your repo

    Branches against your codebase with the schema, rendering and template changes. Reviewed by your team, merged on your process, no separate stack to maintain.

  • 02

    Rendering and performance

    Content moved into the server response, Core Web Vitals kept honest, and the framework configured so future pages inherit the fix rather than needing it applied again.

  • 03

    Information architecture

    The URL structure, internal linking and page-type design that lets both a crawler and a model understand what the site covers and which page answers what.

  • 04

    A rebuild, when it's the answer

    Occasionally the platform itself blocks the work. When that's true we'll say so, show you why, and build the replacement, and when it isn't true, we'll say that instead.

04 How it runs

In order, and in the open.

  1. Step 01

    Scope against the audit

    The backlog turned into tickets with an order, sized honestly, so you can see what's a day and what's a quarter before anything starts.

  2. Step 02

    Ship the fast fixes

    Schema, crawler policy and rendering land first. They're cheap, they're the preconditions for everything else, and they can be crawled while the larger work is in progress.

  3. Step 03

    Build the structural work

    Templates, architecture and page types, in the order the source map says will matter, reviewed by your engineers throughout.

05 The difference

Handover model vs This engagement

 Handover modelThis engagement
Where work landsYour team's backlogA branch in your repository
TimelineBehind the product roadmapIts own cadence
ReviewNone, or after the factYour engineers, before merge
What remainsA documentCode your team maintains

06 Who it’s for

Four markets, four different questions.

  • B2B software

    Buyers research through assistants long before a demo. The questions are comparative, alternatives, integrations, fit for team size, and the answer names two or three vendors.

  • DTC and ecommerce

    Category questions now start with an assistant. “Best X for Y” returns a shortlist, and being absent from it costs the consideration set, not just the click.

  • Healthcare

    Trust and provenance dominate. Assistants lean hard on sources they can attribute, which makes structured, citable content and clean entity signals disproportionately valuable.

  • NDIS and disability services

    Participants and coordinators ask assistants for local providers. The answers lean on directories, reviews and clearly structured service pages, which most providers have never marked up.

07 Questions

What buyers ask about this one.

Something not covered? Ask us directly and we’ll answer straight.

Why can't our own developers do this?
They can, and sometimes they should. The problem is rarely capability. It's the queue. GEO work competes with the product roadmap, loses, and the audit's recommendations are still open a quarter later. We take it off that critical path; if your team would rather own it, we hand over specs and review what lands.
Do you need access to our repository?
Yes, on a branch. We work in your codebase, follow your review process, and nothing merges without your engineers approving it. We don't run a parallel stack, that would be easier for us and would leave you maintaining something you didn't build.
What if we're on Shopify or Webflow?
Most platforms allow more than teams assume: injected JSON-LD, template overrides, edge rewrites. We tell you which parts of the work are possible on your stack before you commit. Where a platform genuinely blocks it, that's a rebuild conversation and we'll show you the specific blocker rather than asserting one.
How is this priced?
Scoped against the backlog after the audit, so the number reflects what your site needs rather than a package tier. The tickets are sized before anything starts. You can see what's a day and what's a quarter.
Will this affect our site's performance?
It usually improves it. Moving content into the server response is the same change that helps Core Web Vitals, and we keep those measured throughout rather than trading speed for markup.
Do you work in our codebase or your own?
Yours. We work on branches in your repository, follow your review process, and leave nothing behind that your team can't maintain. A separate stack we control would be easier for us and worse for you.
What stacks do you work in?
Most commonly Next.js and the React ecosystem, plus the mainstream CMS platforms. If your stack is unusual, we'll tell you honestly whether we're the right team before you commit, including when the answer is that your own developers are better placed and should take the specs instead.
Do we need a rebuild?
Usually not. Most sites need markup, rendering and structure fixed rather than replaced, and a rebuild is the most expensive way to solve a problem that a template change would cover. We recommend one only when the platform genuinely blocks the work, and we'll show you the specific blocker.

Next step

Start with what your site already says.

The free checker fetches your site the way the assistants do and scores what comes back. It takes a minute, and it makes the first call a conversation about your findings rather than about our process.

Book a callRun the free check

08 The rest of the work