Launch HN: Sitefire (YC W26) – Automating actions to improve AI visibility

36 points by vincko ↗ HN
Hi HN! We're Vincent and Jochen from sitefire (https://sitefire.ai). Our platform makes it easy for brands to improve their visibility in AI search.

We’ve been working together for years and have backgrounds in RL/optimization at Stanford and software engineering. We came to this idea after speaking with marketing teams who were seeing declining traffic due to Google’s AI Overviews and didn’t know what to do.

This space can feel esoteric. Many case studies, few actual studies. Constant battle against myths (e.g. you need a llms.txt vs. you don't need a llms.txt) and "GEO hacks". We try to be more data-driven. And we try to be more bold and build a system that not only monitors, but actually improves traffic from AI search.

While Google performs a single search, AI search engines expand the user prompt into 3-10 fan-out queries. The sourced pages are ranked using a classified algorithm similar to Reciprocal Rank Fusion (RFF). Finally, the LLMs skim the pages and decide what snippets to cite. Our goal is making sure brands have the right content that makes it through this funnel.

Here is how sitefire works:

- The user defines a set of prompts they want to monitor. These are synthetic prompts - we generate them based on SEO keywords and their monthly search volume.

- We submit these prompts to ChatGPT, Gemini, Google AI Mode, etc. on a daily basis and capture the answers. We extract fan-out queries, sourced pages, citations, and brand mentions.

- For each topic, our agents analyze which web pages are sourced and cited the most, and why. They also consider similar pages that you already have.

- Based on the diagnosis, our content agents draft improvements or create new pages, and push them directly to the client’s CMS.

- We integrate with the client’s network logs and Google Analytics to monitor the increase in AI bot requests and human referrals to their page.

This system is continuously updated, so it always shows which content works, and how to adapt the existing sitemap. For one client that used sitefire to optimize their blog, the AI-optimized articles increased their AI bot requests from ~200/day to ~570/day within ten days.

A risk we recognize is that AI-generated content is filling brands’ websites with slop. Whilst it’s still early days and we don’t claim to have figured everything out yet, our intention is to mitigate this by focusing the content on specific, unique information: real product capabilities, real pricing, honest comparisons. The clients still review every page before it goes live, so they can ensure the content is true to their brand.

Some clients use our platform themselves. For others we act more like an agency, automating steps as we go. The goal is for sitefire to run mostly on its own, with clients approving changes via Slack, Claude or their CMS.

Here's a video demo: https://screen.studio/share/fw7VQQak

If you'd like to try what we've built so far, sign up at https://sitefire.ai.

20 comments

[ 3.8 ms ] story [ 52.0 ms ] thread
What do you guys do differently than Profound or Airops?
how do you track where users are coming from?
Ugh. The worst of SEO, but a bunch more of it? Noooooo.
Please don't override the browser's default scroll behavior. It's so jarring and basically never a good idea.
[flagged]
How do models deal with assessing the quality of content and its accuracy/veracity when recommending products currently? What do the providers do to avoid a situation where more content === more traffic? Would love to see links to relevant research on this, if you have them. much success to you, appreciate your ai slop risk awareness.
Regarding the topic of ambient agents, what’s the impact of your product? It’s hard for me to imagine the impact but I guess it must be a necessity if we have ambient agents to get discovered at all right? Nice to see a player from Europe on the market too!
Awesome, How is this different from GEO
do you use same accounts? how do you make sure that chatgpt/gemini etc. dont personalize the queries when used with same account?Also responses change based on location and ip(residetial ip's are treated differently)
This is actually a fundamental limitation of prompt-monitoring approaches — personalization, location variance, account history all introduce noise that's hard to control.

One alternative is page-level structural analysis: instead of asking ChatGPT "do you cite this site?", you analyze the page directly for the signals that predict citation — source density, answer structure, fluency, statistics. No account needed, no IP variance, fully reproducible.

That's the approach I took with writeseo.vercel.app/geo-check — based on the Princeton KDD research (same paper vincko linked above). Different layer of the problem, but more stable as a diagnostic.

Lite >For small brands wanting to get started with monitoring and content. >$249/month

Is $249/month something most small brands/shops can afford? Many have a few $ks in total revenue.

(comment deleted)