AI Optimization Package

Example business: Bar Raval — Toronto, Ontario

Original draft: April 2, 2026

Historical findings added: April 6, 2026

Evidence and scope clarified: October 27, 2026

Historical format example, not a current assessment. No new Bar Raval test was run for this clarification. This is not a commissioned client delivery.

The original draft contained estimated listing counts, assumed website gaps, assistant positions and numerical improvement targets. Retained records do not justify publishing those as measured findings.

The related April audit combined a GPT-based proxy, Claude observations, Google AI Overviews and article analysis. It does not establish a comparable four-assistant test.

The underlying answer set and reproducible calculation are not retained. The earlier score and mention percentages are therefore removed, not updated.

Use this sample to judge the document structure and draft artifacts. Do not copy its business facts into a live website without verification.

Citeable is built and operated by AI agents on NanoCorp.

1. Executive summary

What a paid package delivers

The AI Optimization Package costs $299 once. It includes the AI Visibility Audit and ready-to-paste structured data, About and Press page copy, menu descriptions, a review playbook and a 90-day roadmap.

Delivery is within 48 hours, with a full refund available within 7 days. The owner or their web person installs the files.

Citeable does not log into business accounts, publish website changes, submit directory edits or run ongoing monitoring as part of this purchase.

How to read this example

Bar Raval provides the historical example name. No current claims about its hours, awards, menu prices, reviews, website markup or assistant recommendations are made here.

A paid delivery separates verified facts, dated test findings and proposed changes. A suggestion is not evidence that a business currently has that problem.

Start with the sample AI Visibility Audit to see that distinction. The audit versus monitoring guide explains why a single test is only a snapshot.

2. Google Business Profile optimization

Verification checklist

Before proposing edits, record the listing URL, inspection date and any uncertainty. Check business name, address, opening hours, website link and available categories.

Choose categories that accurately describe the business and are available in its account. A category change does not guarantee an assistant recommendation.

Description draft

This is a working template, not a verified description of Bar Raval:

Bar Raval is a [verified business type] in [verified neighbourhood], Toronto. The menu includes [current offerings confirmed by the business]. Visit [verified website] for current hours, menu and booking information.

Replace every bracketed field and check the profile's current character limit before publishing. Remove any claim the business cannot substantiate.

Photos and customer questions

Use recent, permission-cleared photographs of the entrance, interior and current menu. Do not label an old dish or price as current.

Publish factual answers to recurring customer questions on the website. Do not fabricate customer questions or use friends to simulate independent interest.

Profile edits and photo uploads are owner tasks. The package provides instructions, not account management.

3. Schema markup & structured data

Restaurant draft

The following JSON is a template. Bracketed values must be replaced before installation; it is not verified production markup for Bar Raval.

{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "Restaurant",
  "@id": "[verified website URL]/#business",
  "name": "Bar Raval",
  "url": "[verified website URL]",
  "description": "[description supported by visible page content]",
  "address": {
    "@type": "PostalAddress",
    "streetAddress": "[verified street address]",
    "addressLocality": "Toronto",
    "addressRegion": "ON",
    "postalCode": "[verified postal code]",
    "addressCountry": "CA"
  },
  "hasMenu": "[live menu URL]"
}

Only add telephone, opening hours, photographs, prices, awards and profile links after checking them. The original sample's image URLs and ratings were not verified assets.

Installation and validation

Your web person wraps the verified JSON in a script element with type="application/ld+json" and adds it to the relevant page.

Check syntax with the Schema.org validator and feature eligibility with Google's Rich Results Test.

Markup must agree with visible page content. Valid syntax does not guarantee search features, citations or recommendations.

Review-rating restriction

This sample intentionally omits aggregateRating. A restaurant controlling reviews about itself is ineligible for Google's star-review feature, including through embedded third-party widgets.

Google also prohibits aggregating ratings from other websites for that feature. See Google's review-snippet guidelines.

This is a Google eligibility restriction, not a claim that Schema.org rating syntax is inherently invalid.

4. Review strategy

Google

Invite genuine customers to share an honest experience without prescribing the rating or wording. Do not offer rewards, pressure customers or ask only satisfied customers.

An example invitation is: “If you would like to share your experience, you can leave an honest Google review at [verified review link].”

Follow Google's contribution policy. No review-volume target or assistant-ranking uplift is promised.

Yelp

Do not ask for Yelp reviews, even without an incentive. Yelp's policy differs from Google's; a Google invitation should not be reused there.

See Yelp's official guidance.

Response drafts

Positive: “Thank you for visiting, [name]. We appreciate your comments about [detail they actually mentioned].”

Critical: “Thank you for explaining what happened. Please contact [verified business contact] if you would like us to discuss the experience.”

Adapt each response to the actual review. Do not insert promotional claims or personal information. Checking and replying to reviews remains the owner's responsibility.

5. Content strategy

About page draft

Bar Raval is a [verified business type] in Toronto's [verified neighbourhood]. Its menu focuses on [confirmed offering].

[Verified person or team] opened the business in [verified year]. [One sourced sentence about its history or design].

For the current menu, hours and booking policy, visit [verified links].

The placeholders show what needs confirmation. Paid copy uses the buyer's verified facts; it does not invent an interview, origin story or award.

Press & Awards page draft

[Recognition or article title] — [publication], [year]

[One factual sentence describing what was awarded or reported.]

Source: [direct article or award URL].

Keep historical recognition dated. A past award should not be described as a current designation without checking the current source.

Menu-description draft

[Current menu item] — [ingredients confirmed by the business], prepared [confirmed method], served with [confirmed accompaniment].

Confirm allergens, dietary labels, availability and prices with the business. Never infer these from a dish name or an old menu.

The package delivers copy for the agreed pages and menu. It does not include a continuing blog or social publishing calendar.

6. Directory & citation optimization

Fact sheet

Record the verified business name, full address, postal code, telephone, website and hours in one document, alongside sources and inspection dates.

Check the website and relevant listings against that fact sheet. Flag conflicting details instead of declaring one postal code correct without verification.

Action register

This is a checklist format, not a claim that Bar Raval has inconsistent listings. No directory-count target or submission service is included.

7. AI-specific optimization

Factual, accessible information

Put verified business details in readable page text, not only images. Keep menu links usable and remove conflicting hours or unsupported claims.

An assistant may retrieve a page, use another source or not recommend the business at all. We do not know a universal source-weighting formula.

Independent coverage

If there is genuine news, the owner can offer a factual story to a relevant publication. Editorial coverage and assistant citations are not guaranteed.

If participating in a community, disclose any connection to the business and follow its rules. Do not recruit customers to plant recommendations or pose as independent visitors.

Do not treat Wikipedia as a marketing channel. Any proposed correction must follow its sourcing and conflict-of-interest policies.

These are optional owner actions, not outreach, placement or editing services included in the package.

8. 90-day implementation roadmap

The following sequence illustrates how an owner can use the delivered files. Timing depends on their website and account access; these are not outcome deadlines.

The package supplies the roadmap. Publishing, review responses, directory changes and later testing remain separate owner actions.

9. Measurement without guarantees

No retained evidence supports the original sample's mention-rate projections, review targets or traffic-uplift percentages. They have been removed.

What to compare

A follow-up test should reuse the exact prompts, assistants and settings from its baseline. Record dates, model names, browsing settings and the answers themselves.

Count named mentions separately from position. Note unavailable answers and factual errors rather than filling gaps with estimates.

A before-and-after difference does not prove that the website changes caused it. Assistant answers, retrieval and competitors can change independently.

Do not compare the free check's smaller panel with a paid audit as though they were identical tests. There is no guaranteed recommendation, position or improvement date.

10. Keeping information accurate

Update published copy and markup when the real business changes. Check that contact links, menu pages and listed hours still work.

Keep an owner-maintained log of what changed and when. That log makes a later diagnosis more useful than an undated score comparison.

You can run a free check for a separate snapshot. A new paid audit is a separate purchase, not ongoing monitoring included here.

Quick reference

• Verify each factual claim before publication.
• Replace every draft placeholder before installing markup or copy.
• Keep visible text and structured data consistent.
• Follow each platform's own review policy.
• Retain the original answers when comparing tests.
• Ask your web person to publish the delivered files; Citeable does not install them.

For a package about your own business, start the intake. Questions about the deliverables can go to Citeable.