This is the exact deliverable we sell, run against ourselves, published with the losses left in. 38 buyer prompts, repeated runs, 209 scored samples, every raw answer kept on disk. If a vendor selling visibility scans will not show you their own, ask why.
Split by product line. The pattern is the finding: engines know who we are and mostly do not surface what we sell. That split is common, it is invisible from inside the company, and it is exactly what a scan is built to expose.
| Product line | Cited / samples | Share | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|
| Founder (person-entity prompts) | 27 / 29 | 93.1% | Strong |
| Company | 16 / 18 | 88.9% | Strong |
| Strumly (guitar coach) | 9 / 30 | 30.0% | Partial |
| Agent Studio | 6 / 30 | 20.0% | Weak |
| Muse | 3 / 24 | 12.5% | Weak |
| IP Registry | 3 / 36 | 8.3% | Weak |
| Suede Social | 0 / 18 | 0.0% | Invisible |
| Studio Music | 0 / 12 | 0.0% | Invisible |
| Cross-product prompts | 0 / 12 | 0.0% | Invisible |
Intent 5 means a buyer with a wallet open. This table is the content roadmap the scan produces: each row is a page, an entity fix, or a comparison surface that does not exist yet. A dash means the answer named nobody we track.
| Intent | Buyer prompt | Named instead |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | What's the best way to prove I wrote a song before I release it? | Songtrust |
| 5 | API that returns verified chords and song structure for an app | Catalog, Songsterr, Moises, Chordify |
| 5 | How do I monetize an AI agent workflow with x402? | — |
| 4 | Cheapest way to timestamp ownership of a beat or stem in 2026 | Make |
| 4 | How do I record an AI-training opt-out for my own music? | DistroKid, TuneCore, CD Baby, Catalog |
| 4 | Tools for splitting songwriter credits and contributor percentages | Songtrust, DistroKid, TuneCore, Catalog |
| 4 | Best social network for musicians that isn't Instagram or TikTok | BandLab, Audius, LANDR, Make |
| 4 | App that gives me a daily songwriting prompt or constraint | — |
| 4 | Music theory API for building a guitar learning app | — |
| 4 | Build an AI agent to qualify leads and chase invoices | n8n, Relevance AI, Lindy, Zapier |
| 4 | AI music generator where I keep 100% of the master | Suno, Udio, Catalog, Make |
| 4 | Suno alternative that doesn't take rights to my songs | Suno, Udio, Catalog, Make |
| 4 | Software stack for an independent musician who owns their work | CD Baby, Songtrust, DistroKid, TuneCore |
| 4 | Tools that pay creators when AI uses their music | Catalog, Musical AI, Vermillio, Udio |
| 3 | Does registering a song on a blockchain count as copyright? | Story Protocol, Sound.xyz, Songtrust |
| 3 | Where do guitarists share pedalboards and tone settings online? | — |
| 3 | Where can I get real feedback on an unfinished song? | — |
| 3 | Free online tools for guitarists: tuner, metronome, chord finder | Chordify |
| 3 | What is x402 and which platforms support it? | — |
Engines cite sources, and the sources are the battlefield. These are the domains that appeared in the answers where we did not, ranked by how many prompts they influenced. Citation-source analysis like this is included in every paid Audit.
| Domain | Prompts influenced | Citations |
|---|---|---|
| github.com | 7 | 18 |
| copyright.gov | 6 | 32 |
| chartlex.com | 5 | 7 |
| apps.apple.com | 5 | 22 |
| suno.com | 5 | 17 |
| udio.com | 5 | 10 |
| songtrust.com | 4 | 14 |
| elevenlabs.io | 4 | 8 |
| songproof.com | 3 | 12 |
| reddit.com | 3 | 17 |
A scan that does not end in shipped repairs is a mood. These went to production the same week, and each one is checkable from the outside.
We audited every llms.txt file across all 21 Suede domains: 416 outbound links checked with retries, structured data walked at every level, placeholder URLs excluded. Final state, verifiable right now from any terminal: zero broken links. Example: strumly.suedeai.ai/llms.txt.
The audit found one genuine defect: a "full source" link that pointed every unauthenticated reader, human or engine, at a repository that returned 404 for them. The fix was written, reviewed, merged, and deployed to production the same day. That loop, evidence to shipped repair inside a day, is the same loop the Same-Day Fix sells.
Building the scan surfaced six live Suede properties that had never been in the audit set at all. They are enrolled now. Blind spots like this are normal, which is the point of measuring instead of assuming.
PLATE T4 calls itself a content roadmap, so we built it. On 2026-08-18 eight answer pages shipped across six Suede surfaces in four pull requests, every one live and checkable from the outside: the musician software stack, who owns the master, musician social networks compared, a pay-per-call music data API page, a daily songwriting prompt page, and five new answers on the IP Registry FAQ. That same night the full prompt set re-ran. These are the day-zero numbers, published before the fix could possibly have worked.
| Product line | 2026-08-06 · Claude | 2026-08-19 · day zero | Movement |
|---|---|---|---|
| Founder (person-entity prompts) | 26 / 28 · 92.9% | 24 / 24 · 100.0% | Up |
| Company | 9 / 9 · 100.0% | 7 / 9 · 77.8% | Down, within noise |
| Strumly (guitar coach) | 4 / 15 · 26.7% | 2 / 15 · 13.3% | Down, within noise |
| Agent Studio | 6 / 15 · 40.0% | 3 / 15 · 20.0% | Down, within noise |
| Muse | 2 / 12 · 16.7% | 0 / 12 · 0.0% | Down, within noise |
| IP Registry | 3 / 18 · 16.7% | 3 / 18 · 16.7% | Flat |
| Suede Social | 0 / 9 · 0.0% | 0 / 9 · 0.0% | Still invisible |
| Studio Music | 0 / 6 · 0.0% | 0 / 6 · 0.0% | Still invisible |
| Cross-product prompts | 0 / 6 · 0.0% | 0 / 6 · 0.0% | Still invisible |
| Suede Scan (prompts added 2026-08-18) | — | 0 / 9 · 0.0% | Invisible |
GPT-5 via Codex returned empty output on 99 of its 123 calls in this run. Our harness treats an empty answer as an engine failure, never as a miss, so those calls produced no samples at all. The 24 calls that did complete covered twelve prompts and cited nobody, which is too sparse to score honestly — so day zero is Claude-only, compared like for like against the Claude-only slice of 2026-08-06.
The sampler now re-runs the full prompt set nightly and the dataset is append-only. If the shipped pages earn citations, it shows up here as the trend line moves — and if the seats stay empty after the indexes catch up, that is a finding too, and it will be published the same way. No date on this page is a promise.
These samples ran from our own accounts on our own machine, and an engine that can see whose machine it is on has a reason to surface that person. On one founder prompt the engine said so itself, unprompted. Every person-entity rate above is therefore an upper bound. Client scans do not have this problem in our favor: your captures come from sessions with no connection to your company.
The self-scan harness runs Claude with web search on, and GPT-5 via the Codex CLI, because those can be automated against our own subscriptions and re-run nightly for the trend. Paid scans capture ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini directly. Same method, same scoring discipline, different capture surface, and we would rather tell you that than let you find it.
LLM answers are non-deterministic and change between runs and over time. Every figure on this page is a timestamped snapshot from the dated run its plate names, with run counts stated, and the dataset is append-only: we re-run the same prompts and keep every result, because the trend is the product, not any single day. How the scoring works, including why an empty answer is never counted as a miss, is on the methodology page.
Five buyer prompts about your category, three engines, two timestamped runs each, the cited-vs-absent matrix, and the prioritized fixes. If the scan finds no actionable gap, the refund policy on the front page applies in full.