Before buying AI search support, ask the supplier to name the problem it will solve. A confusing description of your service, an access fault and a wish for more enquiries are different problems. Each needs a different scope and a different way to judge progress.
Ask what you will receive
A useful proposal might include a record of selected public answers, checks of important service information, a list of verified website faults and implementation of agreed corrections. Each item should have an owner and an acceptance check.
Be cautious with packages described only as visibility scores, prompt tracking or a fixed volume of AI-ready articles. Ask what decision those outputs support and what practical change the practice receives.
Ask to see how a result was measured
Request a sample report with the questions tested, dates, services, visible sources and limitations. A supplier should separate a mention from a citation, a website visit from an enquiry and an enquiry from an appointment.
If a score improves, ask whether the question set or testing conditions changed. A chart can look better because easier questions were added. The report needs enough context for you to understand the comparison, including unfavourable observations.
Check the explanation against official guidance
Ask which published documentation supports a proposed technical change. Google's generative AI search guidance explains that special AI files and artificial content formatting are not a requirement for Google Search. Advice for another service should cite that service's own documentation.
A supplier can test an idea that is not established guidance, but it should call it an experiment. Agree the cost, the expected evidence and the point at which you will stop or change course.
Check what is included in the fee
Does the supplier correct the website or only report problems? Who verifies service facts and clinical statements? Are third-party tool charges included? Who maintains the resulting information? What happens to reports and accounts if you end the arrangement?
Keep access appropriate to the work. Public information checks do not require patient records. The practice should retain control of its important website and business accounts.
Compare two proposals on the same task
Illustrative example: your practice is repeatedly described at the wrong location. One proposal offers monthly monitoring. Another includes identifying and correcting outdated information you control, with a record of later checks. Ask the first supplier to price that correction work too before comparing costs.
Neither supplier can promise when an answer service updates. What you can compare is the investigation, the actual corrections, the quality of the evidence and the cost of continuing.
Choose a review point before starting
Agree when the work will be delivered and when the practice will review its usefulness. A promise of guaranteed AI recommendations is not a substitute for that agreement. If the website's basic appointment information is unclear, address it alongside or before monitoring.
Use the same questions with Kay & Co.. Our SEO supplier comparison guide covers the wider issues of implementation, costs and handover.
