> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.searchable.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# Recipe: Why aren't we being cited?

> Find the sources AI answers actually draw on for your space, and whether the gap is your content or your absence from those sources.

## The one-call version

```
investigate(projectId, question="citation_gap", days=30)
```

Returns your citation trend, the domains AI answers cite in your space, and your
citation share per engine.

<Note>
  Being *mentioned* and being *cited* are different, and the fix is different too. A mention gap is
  a content problem. A citation gap is usually a **third-party source** problem — you are absent
  from the pages the models actually read.
</Note>

## The chain, step by step

### 1. Is the gap real, and getting worse?

```
investigate(projectId, question="citation_gap", days=90)
```

Read `brandCitationTrend` — your own citation volume over time. A decline there
with flat visibility means you are still being talked about, but no longer used
as the source.

<Note>
  `get_source_trends` does **not** answer this one. It returns the trend for the most-cited
  *domains* in your space, not your own citation volume — there is no parameter to switch it. The
  brand-level series is only available through `investigate`.
</Note>

### 2. What do the models actually cite?

```
search_sources(projectId, days=30)
```

The domains carrying answers in your space. **This is the core of the recipe.**
The gap is almost always "these sources do not mention us", not "our page is not
good enough".

### 3. Which sources, specifically

```
get_source_detail(projectId, level="domain", domain="<top cited domain>")
get_source_detail(projectId, level="url", url="<specific cited page>")
```

Down to the exact page being cited. That page — a listicle, a comparison, a
review roundup — is the outreach target.

### 4. Is it engine-specific?

```
get_visibility(projectId, group_by="platform")
```

Compare citation share across engines. One engine citing you far less than its
peers is that engine's sourcing behaviour, not a content deficiency.

### 5. Where you are cited but not surfaced

```
get_prompt_answers(projectId, promptId="<a prompt you lose>")
```

The raw answers. Sometimes you are cited and still not recommended — a
positioning problem rather than a visibility one, and it needs a different fix.

## How to read it

| What you see                                        | What it usually means                                                                                   |
| --------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| Top cited domains do not mention you                | The most common case. This is outreach and PR work, not on-site SEO.                                    |
| You are cited, but not recommended                  | The model reads you and picks someone else. Look at positioning in the answer text.                     |
| Citation share strong on one engine, weak elsewhere | Sourcing differences between engines. Usually not something to fix on-site.                             |
| Citation volume falling, visibility flat            | You are still known but no longer used as evidence. Freshness of the citing sources is often the cause. |
| Few cited domains overall                           | A thin-source space. Owning even one or two authoritative sources can move it disproportionately.       |

## What this cannot tell you

Whether a cited source will accept a mention, what it costs, or whether it is
worth pursuing. The data names the targets; it cannot rank them by how winnable
they are.