Crawld for seo professionals
A rubric that shows its working, and a coverage figure you can defend in a meeting.
The situation
You already know what is wrong. What you lack is an instrument that reports honestly enough to hand to someone else, and any measurement at all of whether answer engines cite you.
Which findings dominate here
The product is the same product for every segment: one rubric, 129 checks, the same three outcomes. What changes is which findings do the damage.
Method transparency
Every check declares whether it is a deterministic rule, a graph analysis, a third-party API or a model judgement. You can weigh a finding before acting on it.
Citation share
Per engine and per prompt. A separate instrument from rank tracking, measuring a surface rank tracking cannot see.
Honest denominators
Coverage next to every score. A 94 at 40% coverage and a 71 at 95% are not the same claim, and only one tool tells you which you are looking at.
What the loop looks like
Use it as the measurement layer under whatever process you already run. The ranked plan is a starting point you are expected to argue with.
Where this is a poor fit
This is not a replacement for a broad suite. There is no keyword research, no backlink analysis and no paid intelligence, and none is planned.