How we work: a practical example

Our action board suggests things to change on laup.ai. Here is one card, from “ohh, this looks interesting” to a live change we are now measuring.

By Gullik Vetvik Killie,

1. Ohh, this looks interesting

Card #27: put a short answer under the heading of our Norwegian AI visibility page. Laup was named in 2 of 56 answers to “verktøy for AI-synlighet” and 6 of 56 to “software for synlighet i KI”. It was also small and specific, one page and two prompts, so if it went wrong there was not much it could break.

Card #27 on Laup's action board: Add a short answer under the H1 on /no/ai-synlighet. Priority 67, Gemini and Claude, content gap, Otterly ahead by 46.6 points.
Card #27 on our board.

2. Chatting with Claude

The Laup MCP gives Claude our data: the cards, the answers, the searches the engines ran. So we just asked:

  • “What is card #27 about?”
  • “Can you check what the engines are searching when the prompts are asked”
  • “Can you check if the relevant page contain KI and GEO?”
Claude listing the searches Gemini and Claude ran: AI synlighet verktøy, software for synlighet i KI, the same with AI visibility tools or SEO GEO added, and beste verktøy for AI-synlighet 2026.
The engines search with the prompt's own words.
Claude reporting that KI does not appear anywhere on /no/ai-synlighet and GEO only once, far down the page.
And our page never said “KI”.

Seeing “KI” in the engines' searches, we asked whether our page used the word. It did not.

3. Plausible?

Then the question that matters: “Do you believe in this card? What would prove it wrong?”

Claude answering only partly: when engines read /no/ai-synlighet they name Laup 12 of 12 times, but across 112 answers they read it only 3 times.
Only partly.

When an engine reads the page, it names us. It just almost never reads it, and a better paragraph does not get a page found. We did it anyway, because it is cheap and it tests the idea. And we added a link to the page from our Norwegian front page, which ChatGPT and Copilot do read for these questions.

4. Building it with Claude Code

Claude Code wrote the change, three review agents checked the code, the Norwegian and the markup, and it was live the same evening:

Et verktøy for AI-synlighet måler hvor ofte AI-assistenter nevner og anbefaler bedriften din. Laup er norsk programvare for synlighet i KI: hver dag stiller vi kjøpsspørsmålene dine til ChatGPT, Gemini og Copilot, og viser hvor du blir nevnt, hvem som dukker opp i stedet og hvilke kilder svarene bygger på. Målingene blir til konkrete GEO-tiltak.

5. Submit to indexes

A change does nothing until the engines' search indexes have the new page: Google for Gemini, Bing for Copilot, Brave for Claude. So right after the deploy we submitted both changed pages to all three, and watched our request log for the crawlers:

Submitted 8 October 20:10 UTC; first crawl since then per index (UTC)
Index/no/ai-synlighet/no, the front page
Googlefor Gemini9 Oct 04:028 Oct 20:13
Bingfor Copilot10 Oct 02:40not yet
Bravefor Claude10 Oct 06:2610 Oct 06:26

Google came within hours, Brave and Bing within a day or two. Bing still has the old front page.

6. Measuring

From the moment it went live, the card measures itself:

The measurement on card #27 after two nights: 7.1% to 25% of answers naming Laup. ChatGPT 10.7% to 50%, Copilot 3.6% to 25%, Gemini 14.3% to 25%, Claude 0% to 0%. 112 answers before, 16 so far.
Card #27 after two nights.

Looks great, but it is only 2 nights, which could easily be noise. We'll see after a few weeks.

7. Takeaway

A card is a starting point, not an order. Chat with the data before you build, ask what would prove the card wrong, and tell the search engines when you are done.

The previous experiment: Titles & AI Visibility: from 5.9% to 10%. More experiments on our own site are under How we work with our AI visibility.