Turn AI visibility gaps into content worth citing.
Herm turns buyer questions, AI responses, competitor patterns and cited sources into evidence-backed briefs and articles, written with your brand’s authors, point of view and editorial rules built in. The goal isn’t to chase an algorithm. It’s to publish information people genuinely need.
Briefs, full articles and rewrites of existing pages, with your authors, sources and editorial rules applied. You publish through your own workflow, and Herm then measures what happened: read the methodology.
“gentle vitamin C serum for rosacea”
Publish a sensitivity and patch-testing guide, then get the tolerance data in front of the two domains that decide this topic.
- Absent from 7 of 9 runs
- Competitors cited on 3 editorial pages
- No dedicated owned page
- Feed missing sensitivity attribute
The target isn’t an algorithm. It’s a useful answer.
Search engines change. AI models change. Ranking systems change. Optimising for a specific implementation is a moving target.
Herm starts with the information the reader needs, the expertise the brand can genuinely provide and the evidence needed to support it. Search and AI visibility are measured outcomes, not excuses to publish low-value content.
Better content, not more content.
Answering a real buyer need, adding expertise, communicating the brand’s actual point of view, and staying factually defensible.
Visibility evidence shows which information may be missing or weak. It decides what is worth writing, not how to please a ranking system.
Useful, well-supported content gives search engines, readers and AI systems stronger information to work with. Nobody can guarantee a citation.
No hacking, tricking or reverse-engineering models. No keyword density. No guaranteed citations. Herm measures what happens after publication rather than assuming the intervention worked.
Operationalise expertise, don’t score it.
Content grounded in genuine expertise, clear authorship, reliable sources and reader value gives both people and machines stronger information to evaluate and reuse. No platform exposes a simple expertise score, and Herm does not pretend otherwise.
Written from what your team has actually done, not paraphrased from the web.
Attributed to a real, approved author with a stated remit.
Sources named and reviewable, primary research preferred where you have it.
Numerical and factual claims checked against evidence before the draft exists.
Don’t guess what to write next.
Content Suite reads the evidence Brand Visibility already collects: tracked buyer questions, the actual responses AI systems gave, competitor presence, the sources those answers cited and the narratives that keep recurring. From that it proposes work that would genuinely help the reader.
Recommendations are proposals. You choose what gets written.
A brief carrying the evidence it came from.
Every brief names the questions it answers, the responses it was derived from, the claims already approved and the sources currently competing for that answer.
- The questions it answers, and the askings behind them
- The captured responses it was derived from
- The claims already approved for this family
- The sources currently competing for that answer
Writing and approval stay with your team.
Written for a real, approved author.
Content is written for an approved author using their prior writing, your manual style guidance and the brand’s point of view. It is guidance, not voice cloning.
- Their prior writing
- Your manual style guidance
- The brand’s point of view
Your editorial rules should survive generation.
Brand rules are product controls, not a style note appended to a prompt. They are configured once, applied to every piece and checked before the work reaches your review.
Configured once, applied to every piece, and checked before the work reaches your review.
You decide what the work is allowed to draw on.
Content Suite can draw on sources observed through Brand Visibility, additional research, sources you supply, and your explicit exclusions. The full list is reviewable before publication.
- Sources observed through Brand Visibility
- Additional research
- Sources you supply
- Any source you remove
- Whole domains
- Anything the full list review rejects
A well-written falsehood is still a falsehood.
Herm checks factual and numerical claims against source evidence before the draft is approved. Each claim carries the source and the excerpt it was checked against.
Judgements of taste and opinion are not treated as verifiable facts. They are the author’s, governed by your editorial rules. What can be checked is checked; what cannot be supported is removed or sent back for rewrite.
| Claim | Source | Evidence | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| “42% of first-time users report irritation in week one.” | Velora tolerance study 2025 | p.14 · table 3 excerpt | Verified |
| “Fragrance-free formulation, suitable for rosacea-prone skin.” | Approved claim register v4 | claim 118 | Verified |
| “The gentlest vitamin C on the market.” | no supporting evidence | comparative superlative | Removed |
A complete piece, not a prompt output.
Briefs, full articles, and the titles and meta descriptions that go with them, produced against the brief, the author and the editorial rules.
The evidence, the questions and the constraints.
A complete piece against the brief and the author.
Titles and meta descriptions that go with it.
Sometimes the better answer is the page you already have.
Where improving an existing page is more useful than publishing another one, Herm recommends and prepares the rewrite instead.
An existing page that answers the question badly.
A rewrite built from the same evidence.
Where improving beats publishing another page.
You publish. Herm measures.
Herm does not publish into your CMS. You download the finished content and publish it through your existing workflow. Herm then detects the live page, or you mark it as published with its URL and date.
- Approve the finished piece
- Download it
- Publish through your existing workflow
- Publish into your CMS
- Change a live page
- Claim the publication caused a movement
What happened after you published.
Indexing, search and reader signals through Google Search Console and Google Analytics 4, and the tracked questions the piece was written for through Brand Visibility.
coverage, impressions, queries
sessions, engagement, path
the questions the piece was written for
Reported as observations, not attribution.
Underperforming pieces come back around.
Where a piece does not move what it was written to move, it is flagged, and Herm can prepare a revised version from the accumulated evidence. You approve, download and publish it.
The piece does not move what it was written to move.
It surfaces as underperforming, with the evidence since publication.
Herm prepares a revised version from the accumulated evidence.
You approve, download and publish it.
Sometimes the problem is the page. Sometimes it’s the information.
Content Suite sits alongside the rest of Brand Visibility. Each one answers a different question about the same gap.
If the page is already good but unreadable to machines, writing another one won’t help. Fix the access problem first.
Explore Site Intelligence →Content Suite can draw on sources observed through Brand Visibility, additional research, sources you supply, and your explicit exclusions.
Explore Sources & Citations →Competitor evidence shows which questions they are present for and where your information is incomplete. The goal is what you can uniquely contribute.
Explore Competitor Intelligence →Direct answers
What is Herm Content Suite?
Part of Brand Visibility. It turns observed AI visibility evidence into content briefs, full articles and rewrites of existing pages, then measures what happens after you publish.
How does Herm decide what content to create?
From evidence Brand Visibility already collects: tracked buyer questions, actual AI responses, competitor presence, cited sources and recurring narratives. Recommendations are proposals, and you choose.
Can Herm write full articles?
Yes: briefs, complete articles, and the titles and meta descriptions that go with them.
Can Herm rewrite existing content?
Yes. Where improving an existing page is more useful than publishing another one, Herm recommends and prepares the rewrite.
Can Herm write in my brand’s voice?
Content is written for an approved author using their prior writing, your manual style guidance and the brand’s point of view. It is guidance, not voice cloning.
Can I define banned words, brands and sources?
Yes. Blocked phrases, blocked brand mentions, prohibited domains, minimum word count, tone rules and language conventions are all product controls.
Can I control the sources Herm uses?
Supply your own, add more, remove any you don’t want used, exclude whole domains, and review the full list before publication.
Does Herm fact-check generated content?
Numerical claims and factual assertions are verified against source evidence before they enter the content workflow. Unsupported claims are removed or sent back for rewrite.
Does Herm publish into my CMS?
No. Herm does not publish directly into your CMS today. You download the finished content and publish it through your existing workflow.
How does Herm know a piece went live?
Two ways: Herm tracks changes on your site and can detect the page, or you mark it as published with its URL and date.
How does Herm measure content performance?
Through Google Search Console and Google Analytics 4 for indexing, search and reader signals, and through Brand Visibility for the questions the piece was written for. Reported as observations, not attribution.
Can Herm improve content after it is published?
Yes. Underperforming pieces are flagged, and Herm can prepare a revised version from the accumulated evidence. You approve, download and publish it.
Create something worth finding.
Start with the questions, competitors and sources behind your AI visibility. Build a useful piece in your brand’s own voice, publish it through your existing workflow and measure what happens next.
Sample figures on this page are fictional.