What should you prepare
| Input | Where to open it in HaloX | Ready state |
|---|---|---|
| ChatGPT questions | Pro → Prompt Status | Recommendation comparison definition and buying questions are split. |
| Brand spelling | Prompt Analysis | English, Korean, and shorthand variants are checked. |
| Competitor baseline | Strategy Map | Co-mentioned brands are fixed. |
| Evidence URLs | Citation Tracking, Knowledge Hub | Official evidence sources exist. |
When should you use this guide?
| Situation | Signal to inspect | Decision |
|---|---|---|
| The brand is absent in ChatGPT | Recommendation/alternative questions miss the brand | Separate intent gaps from content gaps. |
| Only competitors are recommended | Competitors dominate comparison questions | Move to Strategy Map and comparison briefs. |
| The brand description is wrong | Definition questions show stale wording | Improve official docs and Knowledge Hub. |
| Sales or PR needs evidence | Question-level proof is needed | Record answer examples and actions. |
Workflow
1. Create a ChatGPT question set
Split recommendation, comparison, definition, and buying-review questions in Prompt Status.
2. Classify brand appearance in Prompt Analysis
Record whether the brand is first, one of many, only described, or absent.
3. Check spelling and description accuracy
Review variants such as HaloX and Korean brand names; move incorrect descriptions into source work.
4. Connect competitors and evidence
Send competitor-heavy questions to Strategy Map and weak evidence questions to Citation Tracking.
How do you verify the result?
| HaloX surface | Value to read | Next action |
|---|---|---|
| Prompt Status | ChatGPT question set and recent runs | Add missing questions. |
| Prompt Analysis | Brand position and description accuracy | Fix spelling/source issues. |
| Strategy Map | Competitor co-mentions | Plan comparison content. |
| Weekly Reports | Exposure by question type | Write meeting-ready updates. |
ChatGPT mention check table
| Question type | Decision | Example record | Next action |
|---|---|---|---|
| Recommendation | Included or missing | Candidate 3 for “AI search optimization tools” | Maintain or improve comparison content |
| Comparison | Position vs competitors | A and B appear before HaloX | Strategy Map, comparison page |
| Definition | Description accuracy | Correct GEO platform description or stale wording | Improve official intro and FAQ |
| Buying review | Conversion readiness | Missing in pricing or adoption questions | Improve pricing/adoption docs |
What commonly blocks teams
Is it a bug if GSC/GA4 numbers and HaloX scores do not match exactly?
Is it a bug if GSC/GA4 numbers and HaloX scores do not match exactly?
No. GSC and GA4 describe search traffic and user behavior, while HaloX AVI, citation rate, and source visibility describe how the brand and sources appear in AI answers. They support the same operating decision but use different measurement units.
Should the same question set be reused forever?
Should the same question set be reused forever?
Keep baseline questions, but add separate sets when products, competitors, or buyer questions change. Do not overwrite the baseline; split the comparison axis so weekly reports can explain the cause of movement.
Where should the guide output be recorded?
Where should the guide output be recorded?
Move evidence into Weekly Report and Exports, and convert actions into Content Production briefs or Site Audit issues. In meetings, report the question group, source gap, and next action together, with the score.
Related docs
AI Visibility Index
Read the core AI visibility score.
Prompt Analysis
Inspect answers and citations by question.
Content Production
Turn findings into briefs.
Weekly Reports
Package changes for meetings.