AI SEO Tools: Agents, Add-ons, Prompts

For SEO, the best use of AI is checking and drafting, not mass-producing pages. A script audits your own site for missing or duplicate titles, headings and index problems, a model drafts fixes for the flagged pages only, and a person approves what goes live. Google's guidance supports this and warns against scaled content with no added value. Checked 31 October 2026.

The job in one table

What the job is

SEO is the work of making pages findable and useful for people who search. It mixes technical checks (can search engines crawl and index the page, is the title sensible), content work (does the page answer the question better than others) and measurement (did it help). The technical checks are tedious and rule-based, which suits software. The content work needs knowledge, taste and facts, which suits people.

AI fits the middle. It can read a crawl report, group the issues and write fix suggestions in seconds. It cannot know what your customers search for, and it can write plausible nonsense. Google's guidance on generative AI says output can be wrong because models predict likely words instead of retrieving facts, and tells creators to fact-check and review AI-generated content before publishing.

Google's guidance, in plain terms

Google's page on generative AI content makes these points, which shape how to use any AI SEO tool:

• Using generative AI to produce many pages without adding value for users may violate the spam policy on scaled content abuse.
• Review metadata too: title elements, meta descriptions, structured data and image alt text, since these can appear in search results.
• Explaining how content was made can give readers useful context.
• Its title-link documentation says there is no limit on title length, but titles are truncated to fit the device width.

The practical rule: draft metadata and improvements for pages that already have value. Do not use an agent to produce hundreds of thin pages. If the plan is to mass-produce articles, the tool is wrong and the policy is a real risk.

Which agent fits

Be honest about what AI cannot replace. Keyword volume and backlink data come from large datasets that only the suite vendors hold. An agent can read exports from them, but it cannot produce them.

Add-ons that help

Costs on our pages: Exa has a free tier, then $19 to $749 a month; Brave Search is $5 per 1,000 requests with $5 free monthly; Tavily's free plan is 1,000 credits a month; Firecrawl's free plan is 1,000 credits and Hobby is $19. Browse the catalogue at MCP servers and see what MCP servers are.

Prompts and kit items

Our SEO page audit skill is a reusable procedure for checking one page against a fixed list. Read what an agent skill is if the format is new. The browser QA recipe covers visual checks, and the prompt library has SEO prompts by task. For docs and standing rules, the CLAUDE.md starter is where you record your title format and tone.

A safe workflow, step by step

The build guide has the code. The shape:

1. Split checks from judgement. Rules a script can check (missing title, duplicate heading, noindex) run in code. Taste goes to people.
2. Write the audit script. It reads your sitemap, fetches each page politely and records title, description, headings, canonical and robots signals.
3. Draft fixes only for flagged pages. The model sees the page text and the rule it broke.
4. Keep inside Google's guidance. Short, descriptive metadata for pages with real value.
5. Add judgement jobs for people. Which pages to merge, which topics to write.
6. Test on a small batch, review, then apply.
7. Schedule it and watch change. A weekly diff beats a yearly audit.

Build the URL list from your sitemap, pace the crawl so you do not load your own server, and remember that a script cannot see everything, such as content that appears only after interaction.

What it costs

Model. From Anthropic's pricing page, checked 31 October 2026, Haiku 5.5 is $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens for prompts up to 100,000 tokens. Sonnet 5.5 is $2 and $10.

Worked example (the token counts are our assumptions). A metadata draft with 1,000 input tokens and 150 output tokens on Haiku costs $0.0001 plus $0.000075, well under a cent. On Sonnet it costs $0.002 plus $0.0015, about $0.0035.

Tools and people. The script is free to run. Search and crawl services bill separately, as listed above. SEO suites carry their own subscriptions, so price any keyword or crawl tool you add from its pricing page. The big cost is review time: reading 2,000 draft titles takes hours. Use the model for the pages where the fix is not obvious, and fix mechanical issues in code.

Risks and how to review them

Measure it

Search results move slowly and for many reasons. Change a small batch, wait, and compare with pages you did not change.

What a useful audit report looks like

The script should output a table a person can act on, one row per problem, grouped by type. An example with made-up pages:

Only the first four rows need a model at all. The rest are code fixes or decisions. This split is the main saving: a script finds the whole list, and the model touches a small share.

Rules for AI-drafted metadata

• Describe the page as it is. Never promise what the page does not contain.
• Put the main idea first, so a truncated title still makes sense.
• Keep descriptions to a sentence or two in plain words.
• No invented numbers, ratings or prices.
• Match the site's voice, from three examples you supply.
• Make every title unique among the pages being changed.
• Output a before and after for each page, so a reviewer can accept or reject quickly.

Google's title-link documentation says titles can be shortened or replaced in results, so treat metadata as a strong suggestion to the search engine and not a command.

Topic research without mass production

Use search add-ons to find questions people ask and gaps in what ranks, then give a writer a brief. A good brief lists the question, the search results you read, what they miss, the facts the writer must verify and the page it should link to. The model can cluster the questions and summarise the gap in minutes. It should not write the article unless a person who knows the subject will fact-check and rewrite it, as Google's guidance on reviewing AI content advises.

Internal links

An agent is well suited to suggesting links between related pages: give it a list of titles and URLs and ask which pairs are related, with one sentence on why. A reviewer accepts the useful ones. This is low risk, because links are visible and easy to remove, and it helps readers find the next page.

Visibility in AI answers

More searches now end in an AI-written answer. Each AI search product chooses its own sources and publishes little about how. We do not know of a trick, and any tool that promises guaranteed citations should be checked closely. A clear answer near the top, accurate facts and a sensible structure are the safe habits. Our own pages follow a simple habit: answer the question in the first sixty words, then show the evidence.

Who should do what

Related tasks: AI lead generation for outbound, AI social media management for distribution, AI documentation for help content.

Our take

AI is useful for the boring half of SEO and dangerous for the creative half. Let it find the problems and draft the small fixes, keep a person on content and facts, and never use it to publish pages in bulk. The model cost is tiny; the review is the work. We built this from Google's published guidance, vendor pages and our build guide, and have not run an SEO campaign with these tools. Rankings are not promised by any tool, and any suite's claims are marked for you to confirm.