AI Content Scorer

Score content for AI citability with optimization recommendations.

AI Content Scorer for quotability, not authorship

Paste a URL or your draft. We score how easily an engine can lift a sentence from it and quote it: whether the claim arrives before the wind-up, whether each factual sentence names its own subject, whether the numbers stand alone. It is a sentence-level score with a sentence-level fix list. It does not guess who or what wrote the text, and the block below explains why no honest tool does.

Sentence-level, not page-levelShows the sentence an engine would liftNo AI-probability number, everFree, no signup

Built and reviewed by Sayed Hasan, founder of SEOs Hut · Updated 28 September 2026 · Free, no signup

How do I make content quotable by ChatGPT?

Put the claim in the first sentence, name the subject inside that sentence rather than in the one before it, and keep every number complete with its unit and scope. A quotable sentence survives being cut out of the page. Separately, check nothing is suppressing snippets — a stray data-nosnippet makes perfect writing unquotable.

Looking for an AI detector? This isn't one — and here is why we don't build one

If you arrived here to check whether a freelancer used ChatGPT, or because something you wrote yourself was flagged, read this before you go looking elsewhere. OpenAI built a detector, published its accuracy, and switched it off: "As of July 20, 2023, the AI classifier is no longer available due to its low rate of accuracy." Its own reported performance was that it "correctly identifies 26% of AI-written text (true positives) as 'likely AI-written', while incorrectly labeling human-written text as AI-written 9% of the time", and that it "is very unreliable on short texts (below 1,000 characters)". Independent testing is worse. So we do not put a percentage on this page, because we cannot produce one that means anything. What we score instead is whether an engine can lift a sentence out of your writing and quote it — a different question, and a measurable one. If you came for a detector, the section below is the most useful thing we can give you.

The detector evidence

Three published numbers, and what they settle

Not our figures. One is OpenAI's own published performance; two come from a Stanford study published in Patterns.

26%

of AI-written text correctly identified by OpenAI's own classifier, while mislabelling human writing as AI 9% of the time. OpenAI withdrew it on 20 July 2023 for low accuracy.

OpenAI, AI Text Classifier

61.22%

average false-positive rate across seven widely used GPT detectors run against 91 human-written TOEFL essays. 89 of the 91 essays — 97.80% — were flagged by at least one detector. The same detectors were near-perfect on US 8th-grade essays.

Liang et al., Patterns (Cell Press), 2023

13%

detection rate for AI-generated college essays after a single self-edit prompt, down from up to 100%. Scientific abstracts fell from up to 68% to up to 28%.

Liang et al., Patterns (Cell Press), 2023

The whole idea, in one diff

The same paragraph, unliftable then liftable

Both versions are competent human writing on the same facts. One of them contains a sentence an engine can quote. Read the why on each — the change is smaller than people expect and it is not about tone.

Unliftable — 71 words before a fact appears

We get asked about pricing a lot, and honestly it is a fair question. Every roof is different, and anyone who quotes you a flat number down the phone probably has not looked at yours. That said, we do believe in being upfront about what things cost, because nobody enjoys the surprise. Having surveyed a few hundred properties around the city over the years, we have found that most jobs fall into a fairly predictable range.

Why: There is no sentence here that survives being cut out. The only one carrying any information — the last — has no number, no place, no company name and no service, and depends on three previous sentences for its subject. An engine summarising this page has nothing to quote, so it quotes whoever wrote the plainer version. Note what is not wrong with it: the writing is friendly, clear and honest. Unquotable is not the same as bad.

Liftable — the claim is the first sentence

Flat roof repairs in Sheffield cost between £480 and £1,900 at Marston & Hale Roofing, depending on deck condition and roof area. A full felt replacement on a 20 m² roof is typically £1,200. Every price is fixed after a survey, so the figure in your quote is the figure you pay. We have surveyed roughly 400 properties across Sheffield since 2019.

Why: Three changes, all mechanical. The claim comes first instead of fourth. The entity, the service and the place are inside the sentence carrying the number, not in a heading or a previous line. And each number is complete — the range has a currency, the £1,200 has a roof size attached, the 400 has a city and a start year. Any one of those four sentences can be quoted alone and still be true and attributable. That is the entire definition of quotable.

The one-line problem that beats good writing

<!-- Theme partial: single-post.php -->
<!-- Added in 2021 to keep a disclaimer out of snippets. -->
<!-- The wrapper grew to contain the whole article. -->

<div class="entry-content" data-nosnippet>
  <p>Flat roof repairs in Sheffield cost between £480 and £1,900
  at Marston &amp; Hale Roofing, depending on deck condition
  and roof area.</p>
</div>

That perfect sentence is now ineligible to be shown. Google names nosnippet, data-nosnippet and max-snippet as the controls over what its AI features can show, and Apple states it will not use nosnippet data as additional context when generating output. The page still ranks, which is why nobody catches it. Check the directives before you rewrite a word — the Meta Tag Analyzer reads what your templates are actually emitting, and the AEO Readiness Checker weights this above every writing signal, because content quality and page structure are separate failures with separate fixes.

The other thing you came to ask

Google does not penalise AI-written content. It penalises one specific behaviour.

“Using generative AI tools or other similar tools to generate many pages without adding value for users may violate Google's spam policy on scaled content abuse.”
<b>Google Search Central, using generative AI content</b> — Google Search Central

Read that sentence carefully, because the clause that matters is "many pages without adding value". The named risk is scale without value, not authorship. Google's guidance for automated content is about the output: "focus on accuracy, quality, and relevance… This includes metadata like <title> elements, meta description elements, structured data, and alternate texts for images." Nothing there asks who typed it.

If you want the actual rubric, it is published. Google's Quality Rater Guidelines sections 4.6.5 and 4.6.6 cover scaled content abuse and main content created with "little to no effort, little to no originality, and little to no added value". Worth knowing as you read them: Google notes that rater "ratings don't directly influence ranking". They describe the standard rather than apply it.

So the two questions people arrive here holding — is my content too AI-ish, and can AI quote my content — turn out to be unrelated. One is about provenance, which nobody can reliably measure and Google does not police. The other is about structure and snippet eligibility, which is measurable and entirely in your hands. A page can be written wholly by a human and be completely unliftable. A page can be AI-assisted and quoted constantly. We score the second thing because it is the one you can fix on a Tuesday afternoon.

Four words that keep getting swapped

Detection, extraction, citation, eligibility

Almost every confused conversation about this topic is two people using one of these words to mean another.

Detection: Guessing whether text was machine-written. Unreliable by its builders' own numbers — OpenAI withdrew its classifier at 26% true-positive accuracy — and biased against non-native English writers, with a 61.22% average false-positive rate across seven detectors on TOEFL essays. We do not do this.

Extraction: Whether an engine can pull a self-contained, attributable sentence out of your page. This is what we score. It depends on sentence construction and where the claim sits, and it is unrelated to who wrote the text.

Citation: Whether an engine names you or links you in an answer it generates. Downstream of extraction and also of retrieval, third-party sources, and non-deterministic model behaviour. Extractable writing makes citation possible rather than certain — check the outcome with the AI Visibility Checker rather than assuming it.

Snippet eligibility: Google's documented gate: a page "must be indexed and eligible to be shown in Google Search with a snippet" to be a supporting link in AI features. A technical property of the page, and the one thing on this list that can be broken by a single HTML attribute.

Scaled content abuse: Google's named spam policy, covering many pages generated without adding value. It is about volume and value, not about which tool produced the text. The distinction is the whole of Google's position on AI content.

Habits, not failings

Five things good writers do that make good writing unquotable

Every one of these is a virtue somewhere else. In an extraction context each costs you the sentence.

Establishing the subject in a previous sentence

What happens: "Our team has worked in the city since 2019. Prices start at £480." The second sentence is the useful one and it names nobody, nothing and nowhere. Lifted alone it is worthless, so it does not get lifted.

Do this instead: Repeat the subject inside the sentence that carries the fact, even when it reads slightly redundantly to a human working down the page. "Flat roof repairs at Marston & Hale start at £480 in Sheffield." An engine reads sentences, not paragraphs.

Warming the reader up first

What happens: Three sentences of context before the answer, which is how you were taught to write and how a person reads comfortably. The claim now sits at word 90 and the opening of the page is about the question rather than the answer.

Do this instead: Lead with the answer, then give the context underneath it. The reader who wanted the nuance still gets it. The one who wanted the number gets it immediately, and so does anything summarising the page.

Leaving numbers to be inferred from context

What happens: "Most jobs come in under two grand." No currency, no service, no timeframe, no region. A number without its scope cannot be quoted safely, so a cautious summariser drops it.

Do this instead: Every figure carries its unit, its scope and its date. "Under £2,000 for domestic flat-roof replacement in Sheffield, as of September 2026." Longer, and liftable.

Using headings as the sentence's subject

What happens: An H2 reading "Pricing" followed by "It starts at £480." The heading is doing grammatical work the sentence needs to do itself, and extraction frequently separates the two.

Do this instead: Make the heading a question a person would type, and make the first sentence beneath it answer that question in full. Score your headings against real phrasing rather than your target keyword — the AI Prompt Miner shows the questions people actually ask.

Rewriting for weeks without checking who is being quoted instead

What happens: Draft after draft, with no reference point. The pages already being quoted on your question have a shape, and you are guessing at it.

Do this instead: Read them. The AI Citation Gap Finder shows which sources get quoted on the question you are targeting — score your page against those, not against an abstract ideal. And where your writing states hard facts, make them unambiguous in markup too with the AI Schema Generator.

Questions

AI Content Scorer FAQ

Is this an AI content detector?

No, and we will not build one. OpenAI withdrew its own classifier on 20 July 2023 for low accuracy, having published that it identified 26% of AI-written text while mislabelling human writing 9% of the time. This tool scores whether an engine can extract and quote your writing — a different question with a measurable answer.

Will Google penalise AI-written content?

Not for being AI-written. The named risk is a specific spam policy: using generative AI "to generate many pages without adding value for users may violate Google's spam policy on scaled content abuse". Google's guidance for automated content is about accuracy, quality, relevance and correct metadata. Authorship is not the criterion; scale without value is.

How do I check if my content is AI detectable?

You can run it through a detector, but weigh the result carefully. A Stanford study in Patterns found an average 61.22% false-positive rate across seven detectors on 91 human-written TOEFL essays, and a single self-edit prompt cut detection of AI-written essays from up to 100% to 13%. Both errors run in both directions.

My writing was flagged as AI. What does that actually mean?

Very possibly nothing. In the Stanford testing, 89 of 91 human-written essays by non-native English speakers — 97.80% — were flagged by at least one detector, while the same detectors were near-perfect on US 8th-grade essays. Plain, direct English reads as machine-written to these tools. Ask for the evidence behind any accusation.

What is answer-first content?

Putting the claim in the first sentence rather than after the context. Practically: the primary fact of a section appears in its opening sentence, complete with its subject and its numbers, so the sentence still works when quoted alone. No vendor documents this as a ranking factor. It is a construction choice that makes extraction mechanically easier.

Why isn't my blog post cited in AI Overviews?

Check eligibility before style. Google's stated bar is that a page must be indexed and eligible to be shown with a snippet, and nosnippet, data-nosnippet and max-snippet are the documented controls that suppress it. One stray attribute on a content wrapper makes excellent writing unquotable while leaving the ranking intact.

Does AI-assisted content rank in Google?

Yes, on the same terms as anything else. Google's position is about output quality rather than provenance, with scaled content abuse as the named violation. Its Quality Rater Guidelines sections 4.6.5 and 4.6.6 describe the standard for thin content — though Google notes rater ratings do not directly influence ranking.

Does a good extractability score mean I will be quoted?

No. It means nothing in the writing is preventing extraction. Being named in a real answer also depends on retrieval, on whether third-party sources mention you, and on model behaviour that is not deterministic even at temperature 0. Score the page, then go and check the actual answers.

Primary sources used on this page

OpenAI: the AI Text Classifier, its 26% true-positive and 9% false-positive rates, and its withdrawal on 20 July 2023 — openai.com
Liang et al., Patterns (Cell Press): 61.22% average false-positive rate on TOEFL essays, and detection falling to 13% after one self-edit prompt — arxiv.org
Google: AI-generated content is not penalised as such; scaled content abuse is the named policy; the 4.6.5 and 4.6.6 rater rubrics — developers.google.com
Google: snippet eligibility as the gate for AI features, and the nosnippet, data-nosnippet and max-snippet controls — developers.google.com
Apple: nosnippet-tagged data is not used as additional context when AI models generate output — support.apple.com
Anthropic: model output is not fully deterministic even at temperature 0 — why extractability cannot guarantee citation — docs.claude.com

Keep going

Where to look when the writing is already good

Extractability is one layer. These cover the page structure around your sentences, the pages being quoted instead of yours, and the questions worth writing for in the first place.

AEO Readiness Checker AI Citation Gap Finder PAA & AI Prompt Miner Meta Tag Analyzer AI Visibility Checker AI-Ready Schema Generator All 26 free tools →

Read the guide: Blogging for Small Business: Topics, Frequency and Mistakes and Content Marketing for Small Business: A 9-Step Guide. Want it handled for you? See our AI SEO (GEO) services.