In the six AI engines, Claude was the one that was the hardest to get in with space and keywords. It tends to refer only to what it is sure and right: definition, fact-finding, and origin. To be quoted by Claude, what you're going to do is not write more, but make every single word of the assertion verifiable.
Why, Claude, is particularly hard to "drive over"
Claude’s alignment was careful, and it was designed to be "I can’t confirm" and did not want to create a source that sounds reasonable but has no source. This character changes the standard of what it chooses. When your Lord is vague, his numbers have no place, and his nouns are vaguely defined, Claude usually skips directly, and then quotes a dead-end, clear source.
When we ran the client Brand Radar's visibility track, we saw the same pattern: the same question, ChatGPT might mention five or six brands, while Claude left two or three. It's often the ones whose content is the boldest definition and the most willing to mark where it comes from. It's not luck. It can be prepared.
First thing, write down the definition of death.
Every term you want to be quoted has to have an independent and complete definition in the content, not assuming that the model already knows what you're talking about. If you're selling a contract review software, you need to say something. It is clear what it is, what problems it solves, and where the general document management tool is wrong. When the model comes out, it has to be built on its own, without relying on the previous text. It's a dead letter, and it makes it easier for Claude to tie your brand together with a specific entity.
The second thing is that the facts can be verified.
The vague idea is Claude's filter first to lose something. "More improvements" have little value to it, but "in three months, the answer to the question has risen from 12% to 34%" is not the same: there are numbers, there are time horizons, there are clear measures. The point is not to write the numbers well, but to allow it to be traced back to who and in what circumstances.
- There is a clear point or period of time, without the vague expression "recently recent years".
- There are identifiable sources or operators who know who measured this number.
- There is a clear range and base period to avoid "300% growth" without counting from how much.
- Replace the specific ratio with the word "almost all" word.
The third thing, llms.txt, is what to put.
llms.txt is a plain text file (/llms.txt) in the site's root directory, written in Markdown, which serves as a guide to an AI site that you personally organized. View: Which pages are most important, what each page is talking about, where to start. It's not a magic switch, and there's no public guarantee that it will be read by any engine at this time, but it sorts out "what you want the model to understand first" as the best sample of the machine.
In practice, I treat llms.txt as a good directory, not a replica of the site map. The first paragraph is about who the brand is and what it does; then a link is used to list the core pages, and each link is followed by a statement explaining the focus. Put the definitional pages, methodology pages, price pages, etc., "to answer clear questions" in front of them, and put the pure guidance pages back, or just keep them.
Disassemble the contents into clean blocks.
Even if the definition and the facts are in place, buried in a long article of East Lacey, the model is difficult to extract clean. The ideal paragraph is self-contained: a paragraph answers a question, and the idea begins, and the evidence follows. The answer structure is particularly effective here, treating the questions that the reader really asks as a cursor and answering them directly with a line below, without going around or laying out. This writing is friendly to people, it is more friendly to models that extract answers, and it almost delivers quoted footage directly to it.
Transnet coherence is long-term trust.
A single page is perfect and just starting. Claude's confidence in an entity comes from the same signal that he sees across the Internet: your official web, profile page, third-party coverage, catalogue, brand name, location, core facts. The signal is consistent, the trust is built up fast; there's a difference of speech everywhere, and the model will only be more careful not to quote you.
ChatGPT would take a little risk to give answers, Claude more like a strict editor. It's only because you can find the right material, it's willing to quote you.— Tenten GEO
Finish these three things, define death, facts, llms.txt, and your content in Claude's eyes goes from "uncertain sources" to "sources that can be easily quoted." If you want to know which level you're currently stuck at, our 30-minute GEO diagnosis will use your actual question to show who Claude is now quoting and why he jumped you.
