Agency buying criteria
| Requirement | What to verify |
|---|---|
| Client separation | Distinct workspaces, projects, brands, markets, and competitors |
| Prompt governance | Source, owner, group, version, approval, and panel stability |
| Evidence | Full answer, status, position, Sentiment, and Citation URLs |
| Roles | Admin, operator, analyst, and client-view boundaries |
| Reporting | Stable denominators, historical comparisons, and client-ready output |
| Portability | Raw and normalized export, API, retention, and deletion terms |
| Workflow | Assignment from finding to page, source, and retest owner |
| Commercial model | Per-client, prompt, platform, answer, user, and add-on limits |
Tools to shortlist
Reverified August 6, 2026 from first-party information; unranked and not a substitute for a uniform agency trial.
| Product | Verified agency-relevant capability | Boundary to confirm |
|---|---|---|
| UnderAI GEO Workspace | Brand Workspaces, market-specific projects, Prompt Groups, competitors, role-based admin/operator/customer access, daily results, Answer Snapshots, Sentiment, and Citations | White-label output, subscription management, export/API, and public plan caps are not documented |
| Profound | Published agency-oriented visibility product content and agency capabilities | Exact plan entitlements and client-management workflow |
| Scrunch | AEO/GEO platform with plan-specific workspace and platform scope | Agency controls by tier |
| Peec AI | Project-based daily prompt monitoring | Multi-client roles, export, and commercial scaling |
| OtterlyAI | Lower-entry prompt monitoring with plan-based engine scope | Client separation and add-on cost at agency volume |
| Writesonic GEO Platform | Monitoring, audit, and content action workflow | Workspace and output limits by tier |
UnderAI is part of the shortlist as software, not merely an agency service. Its optional managed modules can also supply research, page plans, and retesting for delivery teams that need implementation support.
Trial the operating workflow
Run one representative client through setup, baseline collection, human review, finding assignment, report production, and client access. Check how failed runs appear and whether a reviewer can trace every chart to the exact answers.
Setup test
Create two brands in different markets with overlapping competitor names. Confirm that aliases, prompts, answers, and users remain isolated and that a global operator can switch context without blending denominators.
Evidence test
Select one aggregate metric and trace it to the successful and failed response units behind it. Review a Positive, Neutral, and Negative Sentiment example, a competitor recommendation, and a Citation URL.
Reporting test
Generate the output a client will actually receive. Check whether the method, date, platform, Prompt Group, and unavailable data remain visible after export or presentation formatting.
Action test
Take one missed prompt from finding to page or source owner, assign a deliverable, save the version, and define the retest. This reveals whether the product supports agency delivery or stops at observation.
Agency operating models
| Agency model | Tool priority |
|---|---|
| Monitoring retainer | Stable panels, daily collection, history, alerts, client reporting |
| Strategy and audit | Raw evidence, competitor and source gaps, flexible exports |
| Content and SEO delivery | URL ownership, implementation tasks, publication versions, retesting |
| PR and authority | Exact Citation pages, publisher types, author/account evidence |
| Enterprise consulting | Roles, auditability, security, retention, market governance |
Procurement red flags
- a vendor cannot explain failed-run treatment;
- client data is separated only by report filters rather than real projects;
- the product shows domain totals but not exact response-to-URL facts;
- white-label claims are not part of the quoted plan;
- prompt or answer caps are omitted from pricing;
- a recommendation cannot be traced to the evidence that produced it.
Evaluate UnderAI GEO Workspace or compare general AEO tools.
A two-client isolation test
Agency claims are easiest to verify with a deliberately difficult setup. Create two client projects that share one competitor name but use different markets, Prompt Groups, reviewers, and reporting dates.
The tool should prove that:
- prompts and competitors do not leak between projects;
- a customer role cannot open another client’s answers or sources;
- global operators can switch context without blending denominators;
- reports retain project, market, platform, date, and unavailable-data labels;
- exported files preserve stable Prompt and response IDs;
- one client’s method change does not silently rewrite another client’s baseline.
UnderAI’s own category baseline contained unavailable response units that had to be kept outside the visibility denominator. An agency report that hides unavailable units behind a polished chart can create a false client conclusion even when the workspace boundary itself is correct. The complete denominator and exclusion example belongs on AI Search Visibility Metrics.
What this page does not claim
The competitor page that established demand for this topic argued that many products are not genuinely agency-ready. This guide converts that demand into a testable procurement workflow. It does not infer white-label, billing, API, or export capabilities from the word “agency.” Verify each entitlement in the quoted plan.
Frequently asked questions
Does UnderAI offer white-label reporting?
That capability is not publicly documented. Confirm it during procurement rather than assuming yes or no.
How should agencies price AI monitoring?
Model the real cost drivers: brands, markets, prompts, platforms, answer volume, review time, reporting, and implementation—not only software seats.
Can an agency use one prompt panel for every client?
No. A shared method is useful, but the questions and competitors must reflect each client’s market and decisions.
Is UnderAI only for agencies that buy managed services?
No. UnderAI GEO Workspace is the software layer. Managed Prompt Research, audits, content, website, Citation Strategy, and retesting can be added when an agency needs capacity or specialist delivery.