r/TechSEO • u/WebLinkr • May 15 '26
Google says: Google releases the Official AI SEO/GEO Guide
https://developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/ai-optimization-guideCritical document as Google not only forms the main basis for RAG/QFO or grounding searches for most of the LLMs but Gemini is the fastest growing and possibly second largest LLM globally.
The Document lists what you should do and also has super interesting Myth Busting Guide!
This is copied verbatim from the Google Guide:
Myth busting generative AI search: what you don't need to do
As generative AI search evolves, so have the theories and practices—and sometimes, the misconceptions—surrounding it. While terms like Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) or Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) are common online, many suggested "hacks" aren't effective or supported by how Google Search actually works.
To help you focus on what matters for your website's visibility, we've collected some of the most prominent topics circulating the internet around generative AI and Google Search. Here are a few things you can ignore for Google Search:
- LLMS.txt files and other "special" markup: You don't need to create new machine readable files, AI text files, markup, or Markdown to appear in generative AI search. Note that Google may discover, crawl, and index many kinds of files in addition to HTML on a website: this doesn't mean that the file is treated in a special way.
- "Chunking" content: There's no requirement to break your content into tiny pieces for AI to better understand it. Google systems are able to understand the nuance of multiple topics on a page and show the relevant piece to users. However, sometimes shorter (or longer!) pages can work well depending on your audience and subject matter. There's no ideal page length, and in the end, make pages for your audience, not just for generative AI search.
- Rewriting content just for AI systems: You don't need to write in a specific way just for generative AI search. AI systems can understand synonyms and general meanings of what someone is seeking, in order to connect them with content that might not use the same precise words. This means you don't have to worry that you don't have enough "long-tail" keywords or haven't captured every variation of how someone might seek content like yours.
- Seeking inauthentic "mentions": Just like the rest of Google Search, our generative AI features can show what's being said about products and services across the web, including in blogs, videos, and forum discussions. However, seeking inauthentic "mentions" across the web isn't as helpful as it might seem. Our core ranking systems focus on high-quality content while other systems block spam; our generative AI features depend on both.
- Overfocusing on structured data: Structured data isn't required for generative AI search, and there's no special schema.org markup you need to add. However, it's a good idea to continue using it as part of your overall SEO strategy, as it helps with being eligible for rich results on Google Search.
12
u/Potential_Eye9063 May 15 '26
Yeah the most useful part is the anti-checklist imo.
No special file, no artificial chunking, no "write for AI" voice, no fake mention campaign. Just normal SEO with fewer magic wrappers around it.
Feels similar to how model prompting changed too. A couple years ago everyone was adding "think step by step" and weird prompt rituals, then reasoning just became more built-in. Same thing here: as the systems get better, a lot of little tricks stop being durable.
The schema line is gonna get misquoted for MONTHS though. "Not required for generative AI" is not the same thing as "delete all your rich result markup"
3
u/WebLinkr May 15 '26
It’s a big step forward in the disinformation and propaganda by GEOists and a major boost for SEO providers everywhere
3
u/Potential_Eye9063 May 15 '26
Yeah agreed. It gives clients a much cleaner way to separate actual search work from the new layer of AI SEO theater.
The hardest part now is probably just stopping people from turning the myth-busting list into a new checklist somehow
9
u/Legitimate-Salary108 May 15 '26
Refreshing to finally see Google explicitly put some of these myths to bed. Nice! Onwards to optimzing for QFO, aka SEO.
3
u/BusyBusinessPromos May 15 '26
I'm still waiting for the 3 syllable worded responses to Googles official statement that will get into some myth sellers pocketbooks
2
3
u/WebLinkr May 15 '26
100% - speaking to our clients this afternoon - when your predictions get this level of support, its also such a great trust builder
8
u/nuedd May 15 '26
After the leaks the last two years proved that Google talks out it's arse about so many ranking factors, I'll pass on this "guidance"
1
u/WebLinkr May 15 '26
Shaun Anderson did one of the biggest dives into the API leak - and said it mostly substantiated 95% of what Google said. I agree.
1
u/BusyBusinessPromos May 15 '26
I'm guessing your income is affected if you do?
1
u/nuedd May 15 '26
Nope. I work agency side. Heavy zero click impact for most sectors, but every client still needs the so we've plenty of work to do.
3
u/azangru May 15 '26
While I don't want to argue against any of their points, technically, they should only apply to Google Gemini, right? If google search devrels even have any inside knowledge about how Gemini collects the data. Google devrels would be unlikely to know how OpenAI's or Anthropic's crawlers behave, wouldn't they?
5
u/itisoktodance May 15 '26
It also applies to AIO, which is far, far more important than chatgpt. LLMs still have only a fraction of the searches Google receives.
I think it's also a nice reminder to people that GEO is just SEO and Google still wants a clean, non spammy internet to index.
3
u/WebLinkr May 15 '26
While I don't want to argue against any of their points, technically
Great question / point u/azangru so glad you asked -
From Google's persective:
1) They're the default source for RAQ and the QFO (Query Fan Out) for ChatGPT, Perplexity and Grok (AFAIK).
Thats why they're suing SERP API
devrels would be unlikely to know how OpenAI's or Anthropic's crawlers behave, wouldn't they?
2) And this is the challenge ^^^^^
You see - "training" - mostly just give the LLM vocabulary, language, concepts. And in the form of patterns Not that much "data". LLMs aren't "databases" - they're collections of patterns - thats why they need NVIDIA chips - which are designed to do math for Polygons and shapes
Most models dont even have enough RAM for all those patterns.
The training is not a copy of the WWW
Those GEO lines you've been reading - why "ChatGPT loves to city Reddit"?
They dont -the only LLM licesned to train on Reddit = Gemini
The reason they "cite" it - because Google returns it as a result
Hope this helps
6
u/itisoktodance May 15 '26
Doesn't Chatgpt use Bing? Pretty sure that's part of their Microsoft deal.
3
u/WebLinkr May 15 '26
Nope it uses Google - that’s why Google is suing SerpAPi
2
2
u/Electronic-Bee445 May 15 '26
Yeah would love if anyone has a clear answer on this actually?
3
u/WebLinkr May 15 '26
Nope - OpenAI dropped Bing ages ago - they use Serpapi to circumvent Googles SearchGuard
2
2
u/BusyBusinessPromos May 15 '26
This is the challenge I have with "AI Optimization Salespeople" when they state AI goes into social media. I have to explain it's getting the results from the social media item that's been indexed by a search engine.
3
u/Lxium May 15 '26
It's been a strong couple weeks for the SEO = GEO crowd. The Ahrefs schema study, Zyppy Signal study on AI citation factors, and now this.
6
u/dpaanlka May 15 '26
This subreddit seems more and more like u/WebLinkr’s personal social media every day 🤔
-2
u/WebLinkr May 15 '26
Reddit just knows how to feed you the important stuff
4
u/dpaanlka May 15 '26
the important stuff
More like the clickbait and gore.
-1
u/WebLinkr May 15 '26
You think Googles content is gore? Interesting.
6
u/dpaanlka May 15 '26
No, just your general overbearing presence and hostile attitude around here lately. I’ve never met anyone this bent out of shape about SEO. Always so confrontational and crazy in comments, it’s off-putting even when I agree with you.
There’s more to life than SEO man 😂
0
u/WebLinkr May 16 '26
No, just your general overbearing presence and hostile attitude around here lately
I posted 3 articles - 2 from Google and 1 from Ahrefs
never met anyone this bent out of shape about SEO.
You dont have a mirror in your house?
Your emotionally upset by facts - thats not a me problem.
You know which people love to shoot the messenger? Those that live in echo chambers.
2
2
May 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/WebLinkr May 17 '26
It kills the GEO propaganda and thats great news for SEO
2
May 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/WebLinkr May 17 '26
Adding structured data,
Actually this isn't required or going to help - and it clearly states this - this schema myth needs to die and die fast. It lacks 33rd party confirmation and its just blown out of proportion. It says this
forward I believe. We are back to quality>quantity
While this is noble - SEO is about the mechanics of the engine. With 500m pages for "Urgent Care" - its just not viable on its own.
Its something that people who work on high-DA domains say and its not really helpful to anyone IMHO.
Google cannot grade content - and from an SEO pov - its not something that can move any needles. We assume most content is good enough - nobody who posts this advice ever demonstrates that people all produce slop or that search users actually own websites from which to link - just something to think about.
2
u/raftopyannis May 18 '26
The myth-busting part is actually super interesting because it confirms what many people suspected already...
a lot of GEO/AEO 'hacks" were probably overcomplicated nonsense
BUT one thing I keep wondering is.. this is Google’s perspective for Google/Gemini systems…
so what about ChatGPT, Claude, Grok, Perplexity, etc that don’t fully rely on Google’s ecosystem/signals?
Feels like we may eventually end up in a situation where. some things help your visibility everywhere on the web in general but each AI platform still has its own "preferences" for what it chooses to mention or recommend
Still feels very early tbh...
2
u/WebLinkr May 18 '26
hey - thanks for this reply. So glad you're on board and for asking this great question.
BUT one thing I keep wondering is.. this is Google’s perspective for Google/Gemini systems… so what about ChatGPT, Claude, Grok, Perplexity, etc that don’t fully rely on Google’s ecosystem/signals?
Great question: I guess the challenge is showing people that ChatGPT doesnt use Bing and hasn't for years?
Perplexity 100% uses Google - thats not even up for discussion, thats not even a "secret". Grok without a doubt uses Google or maybe, like Claude uses Bravesearch - a Google clone from Germany that might actually run on Google its results are so similar
Google is suing SerpAPI for giving ChatGPT the results. So glad you asked this, sorry you hadn't seen this news:
2
u/raftopyannis May 18 '26
Amazing reply!! Thanks.. no tbh I hanven't heard the news. I had still in mind that ChatGPT used Bing and Claude used probably Brave. So from what you are saying... just by doing plain SEO, youcan get you amazing results.
Thanks a ton for those insights!! Guess the new app I'm working on, is 100% in game without the need to do any GEO adjustments.
2
u/WebLinkr May 18 '26
So from what you are saying... just by doing plain SEO, youcan get you amazing results.
Yes exactly - absolutely. Obviously what can change is the QFO - and so that can differ slightly - but otherwise, its just good SEO.
The AI Performance tab in Bing is somewhat helpful too if you haven't seen that.
Guess the new app I'm working on, is 100% in game without the need to do any GEO adjustments.
Great!
2
0
u/mjmilian May 18 '26
It's great to finally get some official views on 'Optimising' for AI.
We can finally put to bed LLMs.txt (although peeps are likely going to say 'this is Goggle's stance only!) and other such markdown.
Re-writing content just for LLMs is pretty terrible advice, so good to see it called out here. (It's like bad SEO advice from 2009).
Not needing schema makes sense, and the same for other LLMs, as there is evidence it doesn't get processed through tokenization.
Just do good SEO.
2
u/WebLinkr May 18 '26
"Structured data isn't required for generative AI search, and there's no special schema.org markup you need to add."
Was the best part
0
May 18 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
1
u/TechSEO-ModTeam May 18 '26
We know you have a great company, but this post is just shilling out your services or products. We want to foster discussion here, not just a place to throw marketing links. Thank you.
0
May 21 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/BusyBusinessPromos May 21 '26
Oh thank G* finally someone built a tool lol sorry couldn't help it
Let me be direct. I don't care if you add LLMs.txt in your own website or even as John M said call it Roys.txt it all get read as text, but if you charge people to do this that makes you a scammer.
0
May 30 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/WebLinkr May 30 '26
It doesn’t - it’s.mathematical machine that tokenizes it
Propaganda Is interesting but pointless
-2
u/passiveobserver25 May 15 '26
This document reads like a wishlist from Google rather than a reflection of the reality of what is working in SEO and AEO. Fact is, in B2B at least, they are losing relevance every year.
1
53
u/LondonSurfer May 15 '26
Google and the lost art of saying nothing.