The Update
What Google Actually Changed on June 5
Google published its guide to optimizing for generative AI features on May 15. It addressed Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) and Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) directly, and it said the quiet part out loud: optimizing for generative AI experiences in Google Search is still SEO.
On June 5, Google added the other half. It published guidance on evaluating third-party SEO tools, services, and advice. It was not a new ranking system, a new technical requirement, or a new AI visibility feature. It was a document telling businesses to compare what a vendor recommends against Google's own published documentation, and it names the labels being used to sell those services: AEO and GEO.
The first guide tells website owners what to do. The June guidance tells them how to evaluate the people selling it. Together they make one point: AI search changes how information is retrieved and presented, but it does not create a separate optimization discipline inside Google Search.
The Loophole
Closing the AEO and GEO Sales Pitch
AEO and GEO caught on because they gave marketers new language for a real concern. Business owners want to know whether their websites stay visible when Google answers more questions directly through AI Overviews and AI Mode. That worry is reasonable. The problem starts when the new terminology is used to imply a separate Google optimization system, with separate requirements, that you can only access by buying a proprietary package.
Google makes two limits clear. It does not evaluate or approve third-party SEO services, so no vendor can legitimately claim its proprietary AEO process is “Google approved” unless Google said so. And third-party tools do not have access to Google's internal ranking data. Their visibility scores, forecasts, and citation measurements are interpretations, not direct readings of the ranking systems.
That does not make every tool useless. A tool can observe that a business shows up in a sample of AI responses. It cannot prove that adding a particular file, content format, or branded mention is what caused Google to pick that business. This is the same argument the May guide analysis made: the systems are the same, only the acronym is new.
From the Guidance
What Google Says You Can Ignore
- An llms.txt File
- Google says businesses do not need new AI text files, machine-readable files, Markdown versions, or special markup to appear in generative AI search. Google may crawl different file formats, but crawlability is not a privileged ranking signal.
- Tiny Content Chunks
- The theory says AI can only read short, self-contained passages. Google rejects that as a requirement. Its systems can interpret multiple topics and pull the relevant passage from a longer page. There is no ideal page length for AI search.
- A Page for Every Phrasing
- Google's systems understand synonyms and the general meaning behind a search. A business does not need nearly identical pages for every phrasing of the same query. That is the line between keyword duplication and semantic SEO.
- Manufactured Brand Mentions
- Placing a brand name across articles, lists, and forums in the hope that models read repetition as authority does not work. Google warns against inauthentic mentions and evaluates the sources, relationships, and context around a name instead.
- Special AI Schema
- Structured data is not required for AI Overviews or AI Mode, and there is no special schema for generative AI search. Schema still helps clarify entities and unlock rich results, but it describes information that already exists.
The Foundation
Why This Reinforces Semantic SEO
Semantic SEO gets abused too, usually when it is flattened into another software score or content formula. The useful meaning is plainer: organize a website so the subjects, entities, services, audiences, locations, evidence, and relationships are clear. A well-built service page should help a visitor and a retrieval system answer the same questions: what the service is, who it is for, where it is available, what it costs, who provides it, what proof backs it up, and what to do next.
That structure is what query fan-out rewards. A person starts with one broad question, and Google's AI systems generate related searches to examine the subtopics. A search for a Seattle web designer can expand into cost, platform choice, SEO, mobile performance, portfolio quality, and ongoing support.
A site with a single generic page has nothing to offer those related searches. A site with defined services, supporting articles, relevant case studies, accurate business information, and intentional internal linking gives Google more useful relationships to retrieve. That is not a license to publish a page for every fan-out query. Google warns against scaled content built only to capture variations. The goal is enough topical coverage without the duplication. The semantic SEO argumentand Google's guidance land in the same place.
The Build
AI Visibility Is Still a Web Development Problem
The AI search conversation fixates on writing. Google's guidance keeps pointing back at the website underneath it. To be eligible for links in generative features, a page still has to be crawlable, indexed, and able to show up in Search with a snippet. Google still recommends the same technical practices around JavaScript, duplicate content, page experience, and Search Console.
Important content cannot hide behind a fragile interaction or a blocked script. JavaScript frameworks are not bad for SEO, but Google admits optimization gets more complex when JavaScript is involved, which is part of why a pre-rendered static site is easier for search systems to read. Internal links should connect services, resources, locations, and conversion pages by their real relationships, and case studies should name the services and industries they demonstrate.
Being referenced by an AI response is not the finish line. The visitor still has to understand the page, verify the business, navigate on a phone, and find a next step. Meaning has to be supported by usable structure. That is where semantic SEO and real web development meet.
Content
Non-Commodity Content Is the Advantage
Google keeps coming back to original, non-commodity content. Commodity content restates what is already everywhere. It can be produced without direct experience, original evidence, or a point of view, which is exactly what generative AI now produces faster and cheaper than you can. That makes it less defensible, not more.
The material a business actually owns is harder to copy: first-hand project experience, original photography, documented decisions, local knowledge, client questions, case studies, before-and-after comparisons. A contractor can explain why a specific material was right for a specific job. A designer can show how research and constraints shaped a brand identity.
None of that can be reproduced without the underlying experience. Google is not telling every business to become a publisher. It is saying that publishing more interchangeable content will not build a durable advantage. The thing only you can write is the thing worth writing.
Before You Pay
What to Ask an AEO or GEO Vendor
The labels are not automatically disqualifying. A competent consultant may use AEO or GEO because clients recognize the terms. The substance matters more than the name. Before buying a separate AI optimization package, ask:
- 01Which recommendations come directly from Google's documentation?
- 02Which are the vendor's own interpretations or experiments?
- 03What evidence connects the proposed change to the expected result?
- 04Does the work improve the site for users and conventional Search, or only satisfy an AI checklist?
- 05Is the vendor promising rankings, citations, or inclusion it cannot control?
- 06Does its reporting separate Google Search data from third-party estimates?
- 07Will the work create duplicate pages, artificial mentions, or scaled content?
- 08Would the recommendation still be worthwhile if the term GEO disappeared next year?
That last question does the most work. Clear site architecture, original content, accurate entities, sound technical development, legitimate reputation, and useful internal links stay valuable no matter what the industry calls the service. A proprietary file or a temporary content hack does not.
The Point
The Strongest AI Search Strategy Is a Better Website
The May guide established that AEO and GEO are not separate optimization systems for Google Search. The June guidance tells businesses to scrutinize the services and tools making claims about those systems. That does not mean AI search changes nothing. Query fan-out reaches into more specific subtopics. AI responses synthesize multiple sources before anyone visits a website. Original evidence gets more valuable as generic content gets easier to mass-produce.
None of that makes clarity obsolete. It raises the price of not having it. The durable strategy is the unglamorous one: build a website that accurately communicates what the business does, backs its claims with evidence, organizes related information logically, and stays technically accessible. That is not an AEO add-on or a GEO package. It is semantic SEO supported by thoughtful web development.
If the website underneath your search strategy needs that kind of structure, that is the work Green Lake Digital does.
Questions
Frequently Asked Questions
What is AEO and GEO?
AEO is answer engine optimization and GEO is generative engine optimization. Both describe optimizing content to appear in AI-generated answers such as Google's AI Overviews and AI Mode. Google's 2026 guidance is explicit that for Google Search this is still SEO. AI features are built on the same ranking and quality systems as traditional search, so there is no separate AEO or GEO discipline with its own requirements.
Are AEO and GEO separate from SEO in Google Search?
No. Google's May 2026 generative AI guide states that optimizing for AI experiences in Google Search is still SEO. AI Overviews and AI Mode are rooted in Google's existing Search ranking and quality systems. They retrieve information from pages in the Search index and use related searches, known as query fan-out, to assemble more complete responses. AEO and GEO are marketing labels, not a separate optimization discipline inside Google Search.
What did Google update on June 5, 2026?
Google published guidance telling businesses to compare third-party SEO recommendations against its official documentation. It was not a new ranking system, technical requirement, or AI visibility feature. The guidance specifically names AEO and GEO as labels used to sell those services, and makes two limitations clear: Google does not evaluate or approve third-party SEO services, and third-party tools do not have access to Google's internal ranking data.
Do I need an llms.txt file to appear in Google's AI search?
No. Google says businesses do not need to create new AI text files, machine-readable files, Markdown versions, or special markup to appear in generative AI search. Google may crawl and index different file formats, but crawlability does not make a file a privileged ranking signal.
What should I ask before buying an AEO or GEO package?
Ask which recommendations come directly from Google's documentation and which are the vendor's own interpretations, what evidence connects the proposed change to the result, whether the work improves the site for users and conventional Search or only satisfies an AI checklist, whether the vendor is promising rankings or citations it cannot control, and whether the reporting separates Google Search data from third-party estimates. The most useful test: would the recommendation still be worthwhile if the term GEO disappeared next year?
Does structured data help with Google's AI search features?
Google says structured data is not required to appear in AI Overviews or AI Mode, and there is no special schema markup for generative AI search. Structured data still has a valid role: it can clarify page entities and make content eligible for supported rich-result features. But schema describes information that already exists on the page.