50 ChatGPT SEO Prompts That Actually Work (Because They Produce a Backlog)

I run [COMPANY] in the [INDUSTRY] space. Our main competitors are [COMPETITOR 1], [COMPETITOR 2], and [COMPETITOR 3].
 
List 20 queries a potential customer might ask when researching [PRODUCT/SERVICE CATEGORY]. Focus on:
- Definitional queries ("What is...")
- Comparison queries ("X vs Y", "Best X for...")
- Problem queries ("How to solve...")
- Vendor queries ("Who offers...", "Top companies for...")
 
Format as a numbered list with query intent noted in parentheses.

For the query "[YOUR TARGET QUERY]", answer as you would for a user.
 
Then answer these questions:
1. Did you mention [YOUR BRAND]? If yes, in what context?
2. Did you cite any content from [YOUR DOMAIN]?
3. What competitors did you mention?
4. What sources would you cite if asked to provide references?

For the query "[YOUR TARGET QUERY]":
 
1. List all brands/companies you would mention or recommend
2. For each brand, note:
   - Position in your response (first mentioned, recommended, etc.)
   - Why you included them
   - What sources informed this inclusion
 
Format as a table with columns: Brand | Position | Reason | Source.

For the query "[YOUR TARGET QUERY]":
 
1. What sources would you cite to support your answer?
2. For each source, explain why you trust it
3. What types of sources are missing that would strengthen the answer?
4. If my company [YOUR BRAND] published content on this topic, what would it need to include to be cited?

When recommending [PRODUCT/SERVICE CATEGORY] providers, what criteria do you use to evaluate them?
 
List each criterion and explain:
- How you verify it (what sources you check)
- What threshold makes a brand "recommendable"
- What would disqualify a brand
 
Format as a table with columns: Criterion | Verification Method | Threshold | Disqualifiers.

I want my brand [YOUR BRAND] to be mentioned/cited/recommended for the query "[YOUR TARGET QUERY]".
 
Currently, you [mention/cite/recommend] [COMPETITOR] instead.
 
What specific content, credentials, or third-party signals would [YOUR BRAND] need to appear alongside or instead of [COMPETITOR]?
 
Be specific about:
- Content requirements (what to publish)
- Third-party requirements (reviews, lists, mentions)
- Authority signals (credentials, case studies, data)

For the query "[YOUR TARGET QUERY]", rank these source types by how much you trust them:
 
- Company websites
- Industry publications (name examples)
- Review sites (name examples)
- Academic/research sources
- Government/regulatory sources
- Community forums (Reddit, Quora)
- Comparison sites
 
For each, explain what makes a source in that category trustworthy or untrustworthy.

Here's the current content on [YOUR URL] about [TOPIC]:
 
[PASTE CONTENT SUMMARY OR KEY POINTS]
 
For the query "[YOUR TARGET QUERY]":
 
1. What's missing that would make this content citable?
2. What claims need sources?
3. What statistics would strengthen it?
4. What expert quotes would add credibility?
5. What comparisons or alternatives should be mentioned?

Last week, for the query "[YOUR TARGET QUERY]", you said:
 
[PASTE LAST WEEK'S RESPONSE SUMMARY]
 
Answer the same query again today. Then compare:
1. Did the brands mentioned change?
2. Did the sources cited change?
3. Did the recommendations change?
4. What might have caused any changes?

Based on the gaps identified for [YOUR BRAND] across these queries:
- [QUERY 1]
- [QUERY 2]
- [QUERY 3]
 
Generate a prioritized backlog of content and visibility tasks. For each task:
- Describe the work
- Estimate effort (small/medium/large)
- Note the expected impact on visibility
- Identify dependencies or blockers
 
Format as a table with columns: Task | Effort | Impact | Dependencies.

Define [TERM/CONCEPT] as you would for a professional audience.
 
Requirements:
- Cite at least 3 sources for your definition
- Include the URL for each source
- Explain why each source is authoritative
- Note if any sources conflict and how you resolved it
 
If you cannot find sources, say "No authoritative source found" rather than inventing one.

For the claim "[SPECIFIC CLAIM ABOUT YOUR INDUSTRY]":
 
1. Is this claim accurate?
2. What sources support or refute it?
3. Provide URLs for each source
4. Rate your confidence in each source (high/medium/low) and explain why
5. What additional sources would you need to be certain?

I want to publish content about [TOPIC] that AI models will cite when answering [QUERY TYPE] questions.
 
What would that content need to include to be considered citable?
 
Be specific about:
- Types of data/statistics required
- Credentialing needed (author expertise, organizational authority)
- Format requirements (structure, headers, extractable elements)
- Third-party validation needed

Compare [OPTION A] vs [OPTION B] for [USE CASE].
 
Requirements:
- Support each comparison point with a source
- Provide URLs for sources
- If no source exists for a comparison point, note it as "unsupported observation"
- Include a summary table with sources linked

For the topic [TOPIC], who are the recognized experts whose opinions you would cite?
 
For each expert:
- Name and credentials
- Why they're considered authoritative
- A notable position or quote (with source)
- How I could get quoted alongside them

Here's a claim I want to make in my content:
 
"[YOUR CLAIM]"
 
1. What evidence would you need to cite this claim?
2. What types of sources would make it credible?
3. If I can't find external evidence, how should I reframe it?
4. What internal data or case study would serve as acceptable proof?

Evaluate these claims from my content for citability:
 
[PASTE 3-5 CLAIMS FROM YOUR CONTENT]
 
For each claim:
- Is it verifiable? (Yes/No)
- What source would verify it?
- If unverifiable, suggest how to reframe it as a qualified opinion or remove it

Here's a piece of content about [TOPIC]:
 
[PASTE CONTENT]
 
Analyze its citation density:
1. How many claims are made?
2. How many have supporting evidence?
3. What's the citation ratio?
4. Which unsupported claims most need sources?
5. What statistics would strengthen the weakest sections?
 
The Princeton GEO study suggests content with higher proof density is more likely to be cited by AI. Rate this content's "citability" on a 1-10 scale.

When a user asks "What's the best [PRODUCT/SERVICE CATEGORY] for [USE CASE]?", what criteria do you use to make recommendations?
 
For each criterion:
- How do you verify it?
- What sources inform it?
- What weight does it carry in your final recommendation?
 
Format as a ranked list with verification sources.

For the query "best [PRODUCT/SERVICE CATEGORY] for [USE CASE]":
 
List all competitors you would recommend. For each:
- Their primary differentiator
- The source of that differentiator (their site, reviews, third-party comparisons)
- What would need to change for them to lose that position

For my brand [YOUR BRAND] to be recommended for "[BEST X QUERY]":
 
1. What third-party sources mention us currently?
2. What third-party sources mention our competitors that don't mention us?
3. Specifically, which of these would matter most:
   - Industry comparison articles
   - Review sites (which ones?)
   - Directory listings (which ones?)
   - Community discussions (which platforms?)
   - Expert recommendations (whose?)

For [YOUR PRODUCT CATEGORY], what review platforms do you check when forming recommendations?
 
For each platform:
- How much weight do you give it?
- What rating threshold matters?
- Do you factor in review volume?
- Do you analyze sentiment beyond star ratings?

I found these "best [CATEGORY]" articles that include competitors but not my brand:
 
- [URL 1]
- [URL 2]
- [URL 3]
 
For each article:
1. Why might I be missing from this list?
2. What criteria would I need to meet for inclusion?
3. Who should I contact to request consideration?
4. What format do they expect from submissions?

Position [YOUR BRAND] against [COMPETITOR 1], [COMPETITOR 2], and [COMPETITOR 3] for the query "[BEST X QUERY]".
 
Create a comparison table with:
- Key decision criteria (use the criteria AI models weight from Prompt 19)
- How each brand performs on each criterion
- Gaps where [YOUR BRAND] underperforms
- Specific actions to close each gap

For [YOUR PRODUCT/SERVICE]:
 
1. What type of user/company should you recommend this to?
2. What type should you NOT recommend this to?
3. What are the honest limitations?
4. How would you phrase a recommendation that acknowledges trade-offs?
 
Write a sample recommendation paragraph that's honest about fit.

I'm building a "claim ledger" for [YOUR BRAND]. This is a list of things we can credibly claim, with supporting evidence.
 
For each claim below, help me categorize and strengthen it:
 
Claim: "[YOUR CLAIM]"
 
1. Is this a fact, opinion, or outcome?
2. What evidence supports it?
3. How should it be phrased to be both accurate and compelling?
4. What caveats or qualifications are needed?
5. What source should be cited?

I need to build a stat bank for content about [TOPIC].
 
For each statistic:
- State the stat with exact numbers
- Provide the original source URL
- Note the date of the data
- Explain the methodology briefly
- Rate its shelf life (how soon will it be outdated?)
 
Help me convert this raw data into usable content statistics:
 
[PASTE YOUR RAW DATA OR FINDINGS]

Here's a transcript from an interview with [SME NAME, TITLE]:
 
[PASTE TRANSCRIPT EXCERPT]
 
Extract quotable statements that:
1. Contain specific insights (not generic advice)
2. Could stand alone as cited quotes
3. Demonstrate expertise
4. Are controversial or contrarian enough to be interesting
 
For each quote, suggest:
- The pull quote (exact words)
- A lead-in that provides context
- Topics where this quote would be relevant

When we evaluate [PRODUCT/SERVICE CATEGORY], what criteria do we use?
 
For each criterion:
1. What is it?
2. How do we measure it?
3. What's "good" vs "acceptable" vs "poor"?
4. What do competitors claim vs deliver?
5. Where do we genuinely outperform?
 
Format as a reference table we can use across comparison content.

When evaluating [PRODUCT/SERVICE CATEGORY] for clients, what are our red flags?
 
List the signals that indicate a poor choice:
- Vendor red flags
- Product red flags
- Pricing red flags
- Support/reliability red flags
 
For each, explain why it matters and give an example.
 
This becomes our "honest evaluator" reference when we write comparisons.

Here are questions we get repeatedly from customers:
 
[PASTE QUESTIONS]
 
For each question:
1. Write a direct answer (2-3 sentences)
2. Identify follow-up questions it might trigger
3. Note if it reveals a misconception to address
4. Tag which buyer stage it represents (awareness/consideration/decision)
 
Format as an FAQ bank we can reuse across content.

Based on this visibility gap analysis:
 
[PASTE GAP ANALYSIS FROM TRACKING PROMPTS]
 
Convert each gap into a specific ticket with:
- Title (action verb + target)
- Description (what exactly to do)
- Success criteria (how we'll know it's done)
- Estimated effort (hours)
- Dependencies (what needs to happen first)
- Priority (high/medium/low based on query volume and current gap severity)

Here are content updates identified from our AI visibility audit:
 
[PASTE LIST OF POTENTIAL UPDATES]
 
Prioritize them using this matrix:
- Impact: How much will visibility improve? (high/medium/low)
- Effort: How long will it take? (small/medium/large)
- Proof availability: Do we have the data/sources to support the update? (yes/partial/no)
 
Create a prioritized backlog with the top 5 tickets to ship this week.

It's Monday. Here's our current visibility state:
 
- Queries we're mentioned in: [LIST]
- Queries we're NOT mentioned in but should be: [LIST]
- Competitor gains this week: [ANY CHANGES]
 
Generate this week's sprint:
1. 2-3 content updates to improve existing pages
2. 1-2 new content pieces to fill gaps
3. 1-2 outreach tasks (get listed, get reviewed, get cited)
 
Include estimated hours for each task.

Last week's visibility scorecard:
 
[PASTE LAST WEEK'S DATA]
 
This week's visibility scorecard:
 
[PASTE THIS WEEK'S DATA]
 
Analyze the changes:
1. What improved? Why?
2. What declined? Why?
3. What stayed the same despite our work?
4. What external factors might have influenced changes?
5. What does this tell us about next week's priorities?

This content piece needs more proof density:
 
[PASTE CONTENT URL OR SUMMARY]
 
Create tickets for each proof type needed:
- Statistics to find or create
- Expert quotes to source
- Case studies to develop
- Third-party citations to add
- Data visualizations to create
 
For each ticket, include: source requirements, effort estimate, and assignee suggestions.

We're updating our prompt library and visibility tracking. Create a version log entry:
 
Date: [TODAY]
Prompts updated: [LIST]
Scorecard changes: [LIST]
Backlog template changes: [LIST]
Reason for updates: [EXPLAIN]
Expected impact: [DESCRIBE]
 
This keeps our system documented and auditable.

Rewrite this paragraph as an extractable answer block:
 
[PASTE PARAGRAPH]
 
Requirements:
- Lead with the direct answer
- Add supporting evidence
- Include a citation
- Keep it under 100 words
- Make it standalone (could be quoted without context)

Create a comparison table for [TOPIC] covering:
- [OPTION A]
- [OPTION B]
- [OPTION C]
 
Columns: [CRITERIA 1], [CRITERIA 2], [CRITERIA 3], Best For
 
Include source notes for any factual claims.

For the query "[TARGET QUERY]", generate 5 FAQ questions a searcher would want answered.
 
For each question:
- Write a direct 2-3 sentence answer
- Suggest a source to cite
- Identify follow-up content to link

What directories and listing sites matter for [INDUSTRY/CATEGORY]?
 
For each:
- Name and URL
- How to get listed
- What information they require
- How prominent listings affect AI recommendations

For [PRODUCT/SERVICE CATEGORY], which review platforms influence AI recommendations most?
 
For each platform:
- Name and URL
- How reviews factor into AI responses
- Minimum review volume/rating thresholds (if observable)
- How to encourage customer reviews ethically

What online communities discuss [TOPIC]?
 
For each:
- Platform and specific community
- Types of discussions relevant to [YOUR BRAND]
- Rules around promotional content
- How to add value without violating norms

Here's content published [DATE]:
 
[PASTE CONTENT OR SUMMARY]
 
What needs updating?
- Outdated statistics (cite newer sources)
- Outdated advice (what's changed)
- Missing topics (what's emerged since publication)
- Competitive gaps (what competitors now cover that we don't)

This content makes these claims:
 
[PASTE CLAIMS]
 
For each claim:
- Current proof (what we cite now)
- Better proof available (suggest alternatives)
- Proof we should create (internal data, case studies)

Given this content about [TOPIC]:
 
[PASTE CONTENT SUMMARY]
 
And these other pages on our site:
- [URL 1]: [TOPIC 1]
- [URL 2]: [TOPIC 2]
- [URL 3]: [TOPIC 3]
 
Where should we add internal links? For each opportunity:
- The anchor text to use
- Where in the content to place it
- Why this link adds value for readers

Here's a Reddit post asking about [TOPIC]:
 
[PASTE POST]
 
Draft a helpful response that:
- Directly answers the question
- Shares genuine insight from experience
- Does NOT pitch or link (unless explicitly relevant)
- Positions [YOUR BRAND] as knowledgeable without being promotional
 
Follow Reddit norms: be helpful first, be human, avoid marketing speak.

We want to contribute to publications covering [TOPIC].
 
Generate 5 guest post angles that:
- Offer unique insight we can credibly deliver
- Would interest their audience (not just ours)
- Include data or research we can provide
- Position [YOUR BRAND] as a thought leader without being promotional
 
For each angle: title, 2-sentence pitch, data/proof we'd include.

Based on 4 weeks of visibility data:
 
[PASTE WEEKLY SCORECARDS]
 
Generate a trend report:
1. Overall trajectory (improving/declining/flat)
2. Queries with biggest gains
3. Queries with biggest losses
4. Correlation with our shipped work
5. Recommendations for next month

Based on our visibility tracking over [TIMEFRAME]:
 
[PASTE SUMMARY DATA]
 
Generate a quarterly review:
1. Executive summary (3 bullets)
2. Key wins (with evidence)
3. Persistent gaps
4. Recommendations for next quarter
5. Resource requirements to execute recommendations