A GEO service can include buyer-question research, a baseline of AI answers, checks on business information, content creation, website improvements and ongoing measurement. The important distinction is whether you are buying advice, implementation or both. A report identifying missing information is useful, but it is not the same deliverable as an approved page published on your website.
For a Dubai business, the brief should identify the actual services, locations and customer languages being covered. It should also say who supplies the facts, who approves changes and who makes them live.
A well-defined programme connects the question a customer asks with the information your business can provide, then makes the resulting work visible and reviewable.
The scope should name outputs, not just activities
Use this table to clarify a proposal. It describes useful scope questions, not a promise that every GEO package includes every item.
| Area of work | Useful output | What to clarify |
|---|---|---|
| Buyer-question research and baseline | Agreed questions, captured answers, cited sources and initial findings | Which services, platforms, languages and locations are covered? |
| Business-information review | Specific corrections to company, service, location and expert information | Which website pages or external profiles will actually be changed? |
| New and existing content | Named new pages or substantive improvements, with reviewed facts | Are writing, editing, approvals and CMS publication included? |
| Source and citation analysis | Recurring cited domains and pages, the claims they support and accuracy findings | Are exact pages examined, or only domain totals? |
| Technical discovery | Crawl, indexability, canonical URL and access findings for agreed pages | Which checks are included, and who implements any fixes? |
| Content refresh and fact maintenance | Rechecked facts, approved updates and a record of changes | Who monitors changing prices, services, locations and other important facts? |
| External source work | Relevant source research and, where commissioned, documented outreach | Are pitches, publisher fees and placements treated separately? |
| Platform-specific measurement | Named AI/search experiences, sampled questions and separate observations | Which platforms and modes are checked, how often, and what can each measure? |
| Reporting and next actions | Delivery status and prioritised actions tied to evidence | Who acts on the findings, and what remains with your team? |
| Ownership and access | Agreed control of content, accounts, records and handover materials | What remains accessible to your business when the relationship ends? |
The same question applies throughout: what will we receive, and what work remains with our team?
Research should lead to an agreed set of buyer questions
Useful question research starts with what customers need to know before choosing you. A list of hundreds of slight wording variations can look substantial while testing the same buying decision repeatedly.
For a Dubai business, questions might depend on the districts you serve, whether customers need on-site delivery, the services you actually provide and the language in which they seek help. The proposal should identify that coverage rather than promise visibility for “the UAE” without defining the audience.
A baseline should preserve the question, platform, mode where relevant, date, language and relevant location context. Keep the answer, any brand mentions or recommendations, and citations or source links. Identify whether the question names your company or asks for a provider without naming one. This makes later comparisons useful without collecting information unrelated to the brief.
The agreed question set is a research tool. It is not a list of recommendations the agency can guarantee to win.
Business facts need an owner and a refresh plan
For a local business, the scope may include comparing important facts across its website and legitimate profiles or other relevant sources. Actual services, locations and contact details should be checked against information approved by the business. Listing the company in every directory is not a useful substitute for deciding which sources matter.
Agree who will recheck changing prices, availability, service areas or regulations discussed in published content, and who approves updates. A factual correction needs a publication step as well as a note in a report.
Content delivery should finish at a clear endpoint
“Content optimisation” could mean editing a paragraph, rewriting a service page or developing a new guide. Ask for those outputs to be described separately.
For new content, clarify whether the work includes gathering business information, research, drafting, human editing, fact-checking, metadata, internal links and publication. For an existing page, record what is changing and why.
A new page should answer a useful customer need that the site does not already serve well. Adding a few FAQs or changing a title should not quietly use up an allowance described as a new article.
Your business still needs to provide accurate service details, approve commercially sensitive statements and authorise the use of client examples. The agency should make that approval process easy to follow. A draft waiting for your approval should be shown as a draft, not as completed live work.
Technical checks and technical implementation are different
A review can identify crawl access, indexability, canonical URL, page structure or other website issues that deserve attention. Fixing them may require a developer, CMS changes or a separately commissioned project.
Ask the proposal to specify the pages being checked, the changes included and who will confirm the released result. “Technical GEO” alone does not tell you whether anyone will make those changes.
Google requires no special schema for generative Search. Google's AI search guidance. Normal structured data can help Google understand page content, but must describe information visible to readers. Google's structured-data guidance.
Google also says llms.txt is unnecessary for Search and does not affect its visibility or rankings. Google's clarification.
For ChatGPT Search discovery, OAI-SearchBot and the training crawler GPTBot have separate controls. Allowing search access does not guarantee citation. OpenAI's crawler documentation.
That does not make every technical task unnecessary. It makes a defined problem and a useful fix more valuable than a list of supposedly essential AI files or tags.
What should count as a completed improvement?
Imagine an AI answer describes a Dubai business as offering on-site service in Abu Dhabi, although the company only serves Dubai. This is an illustrative scope example, not a reported Lunasol client result.
A useful work item would contain:
- The finding: the captured answer, question and cited page, if one is provided.
- The approved fact: the actual service area, confirmed by the business.
- The action: a specific correction to an owned page or a request to the relevant external source, if appropriate.
- The delivery check: the live page and date of the correction, or the status of the external request.
- The later observation: what comparable checks show after the work, without assuming that an answer change was caused by that edit alone.
If the source already states the correct area, rewriting it may not be the right response. The task could instead be to investigate where the incorrect description appears and document the issue accurately.
This separates work the agency can complete from an answer it cannot control. Correcting your own page is a deliverable. Getting every AI system to repeat the correction immediately is not.
Outreach should identify the work being purchased
A programme may research which external sources appear in relevant answers. Contacting those sources, preparing an editorial pitch and paying a publisher are separate activities.
If outreach is included, ask to see the relevant targets, what was submitted and the response. An attempted pitch is not a published article. A published article is not automatically an AI citation. A paid publisher placement must be identified as paid, not reported as an earned citation.
Keep paid placements and full digital PR campaigns explicit in the scope, with any third-party expenditure approved before it is incurred. Do not assume those services are included simply because a proposal mentions “authority”.
Reporting should show both delivery and observations
Ask for two clear views: what the team completed and what the available evidence shows.
The delivery view can identify published pages, meaningful updates, completed corrections and work awaiting approval. The observation view can show sampled answers, citations, accuracy issues and referral or enquiry information where tracking permits. Those observations should remain distinguishable rather than being collapsed into one success score.
Keep three evidence sources separate:
- Platform data: Bing Webmaster Tools AI Performance provides citation activity, cited URLs and grounding-query samples for supported Microsoft and partner experiences. These are not rankings or coverage of every AI platform. Microsoft's metric definitions.
- Referral analytics: available referral information can identify some visits from AI services, but does not count everyone who saw an answer. Google Analytics traffic-source definitions.
- Agency monitoring: sampled questions and captured answers can describe the experiences being checked. They should retain their own scope and conditions.
Combining these into a single universal visibility number would hide what each source actually measures.
Finish with decisions: what needs correction, what useful content is missing, what should be tested again and what input is needed from you. A chart without a next action is an incomplete handover.
What Lunasol can deliver within an agreed GEO scope
Lunasol connects buyer-question research, visibility and accuracy checks, company-information consistency, new content and existing-page improvements. Its content workflow can include research, human editing, factual review and CMS publication, with the required access and approvals.
That is a practical advantage when you want findings turned into live work: research, content quality and publication can be coordinated within one programme. The proposal should define the outputs and responsibilities for your particular website.
Relevant structured data, technical checks and outreach should be specified where commissioned. Full technical SEO, custom development, digital PR, additional-language production and publisher costs should be defined separately when needed. They are not automatic entitlements of every GEO engagement.
Before work begins, agree access permissions and what content, reports and records will be handed over. Keep your own domain, website and business accounts under clear company control, and confirm the rights to commissioned materials in the agreement.
Discuss your GEO scope with Lunasol. Bring your priority services and website, and ask for a programme that clearly connects research, approved information, published improvements and review.