Overall score
78
Workspace intelligence
Analyze existing articles against the workspace knowledge base for GEO readiness, topic coverage, and claim consistency.
Reopen saved analyses and review completed corpus results.
| Analysis | Started | Status | Corpus | URLs | Score | Published | Open |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| August content benchmarkCreated in SixWings | Aug 23, 2026 | Completed | Completed | 8 | 78 | Aug 24 | |
| Product education reviewCreated by Content strategy agent | Aug 12, 2026 | Completed | Completed | 12 | 74 | — | |
| Employer benefits corpusCreated in SixWings | Jul 29, 2026 | Completed | Completed | 6 | 81 | Jul 30 | |
| Virtual care resourcesCreated in SixWings | Jul 14, 2026 | Completed | Completed | 10 | 69 | — | |
| Remote workforce guide auditCreated by GEO operations agent | Jun 28, 2026 | Completed | Completed | 9 | 76 | Jun 30 | |
| Q2 editorial libraryCreated in SixWings | Jun 3, 2026 | Completed | Completed | 14 | 71 | — |
Add sources, review the exact URL set, then start the analysis.
Add direct article URLs, or retrieve likely articles from an index or root URL.
Retrieval checks the submitted pages for same-domain links that look like articles.
Edit, remove, or add URLs before starting the analysis.
| URL | Source | Remove |
|---|---|---|
| Index | ||
| Index | ||
| Index | ||
| Index | ||
| Manual | ||
| Index |
Completed analysis
Page-level GEO findings and cross-page analysis for the selected content set.
August content benchmark
Completed Aug 23, 2026 at 16:18 · Corpus analysis completed · Submitted knowledge base used
Overall score
78
Claim coverage
74
Consistency
82
Citability
69
Cross-page coverage, consistency, risks, and recommendations.
The corpus clearly explains Acme Health’s virtual primary care model and employer value, but important proof points are distributed unevenly. Stronger cross-page consistency, clearer source attribution, and direct answers to high-intent buyer questions would improve both human evaluation and AI answer citability.
Open a page to review its findings and recommended actions.
Clear category definition, buyer framing, and benefits integration detail.
The nationwide access claim needs a direct supporting source.
Add independent evidence for utilization and employee outcome claims.
Add a concise evidence block and answer implementation questions directly.
Specific audience problem and direct employer value are easy to extract.
Absence reduction percentage lacks sufficient context.
Cite the methodology behind the headline outcome.
Qualify the result and add a short study summary.
Evaluation criteria match high-intent employer questions.
Competitor language is broader than the knowledge-base guardrails.
Add evidence for the adoption benchmark.
Include a scannable vendor comparison checklist.
Strong structure and relevant cost categories.
“Guaranteed savings” conflicts with the approved claim guardrail.
Support the cost examples with attributable research.
Replace the guarantee with a qualified outcomes statement.
Operational steps are clear and highly extractable.
The launch timeline differs from the buyer guide.
No additional external source is required.
Standardize the timeline and define prerequisites.
Audience and buyer problems are consistently expressed.
Product naming is inconsistent with current positioning.
Add support for the rural access statement.
Refresh terminology and link to the primary employer guide.
Useful reporting metrics and practical definitions.
No material claim risk detected.
Benchmarks need clear provenance.
Add a concise benchmark table with sources.
Security terminology is accurate and specific.
Several compliance references are outdated.
Link each standard to its current authoritative source.
Refresh dates, sources, and the summary answer block.