AI Search Visibility Reporting Tool: Client Reports for Agencies, Otterly, Peec.ai, Profound, Semrush

The usual agency reporting routine goes like this: export from a tracker, paste into a deck, write commentary, send. Every step is manual, which is why client reports slip to the last day of the month. This site's premise is that tools should act, not just report. Applied to client reporting, the question changes. Not "which tool has the nicest dashboard?" but "which tool lets an agent assemble the report and queue the follow-up work?"

Why reporting is an agent job

A monthly client report has a stable shape. It pulls the same metrics, compares them to last month, explains what moved and lists next actions. That is mechanical work around a small amount of judgment, and it suits an agent reading live data. We walked through the weekly version in a report an agent writes for you. Here the focus is agency scale: many clients, one reporting routine.

For that to work, the tool needs three things. It must expose data programmatically (API, MCP or connectors). It must let an agent ask questions of the data in plain language. And the data must include outcomes, because an agent that can only see mention counts will write a confident paragraph about nothing a client can bank.

What the Promptwatch agency plans give an agent

Promptwatch is the entry that meets all three. Its connectors include Looker Studio, Google Search Console, REST API v2, an MCP server and Slack. Agent Chat is a conversational analyst over live visibility data, and Unified Actions is an AI-generated to-do list. So the loop looks like this in practice:

An agent connected over MCP pulls each client project's prompt trends, citation changes and crawler activity.
Agent Chat answers the follow-ups a human would ask: why did this page lose citations, which bot errors are blocking the new content?
Unified Actions turns the findings into the next month's to-do list, which goes into the report as "what we will do."
The summary posts to the client's Slack channel, and the Looker Studio report carries the charts.

The self-serve agency plans are Kick-off at $199/mo (7-day trial), Growth at $399/mo and Scale at $799/mo. Every one has unlimited projects and prompts and 10 seats, so one client per project does not raise the subscription. Content Agents can then plan, write and publish the fixes to a connected CMS (Webflow or Framer today, with WordPress listed as coming soon) into a review inbox, which closes the loop from report to action. White-label is an Enterprise or custom arrangement and not part of these plans, so brand the Looker Studio output yourself if you need it self-serve.

What makes the agent's report worth sending is the data underneath: citation analytics, Agent Analytics (real-time logs of ChatGPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, GoogleOther and the Meta AI crawler) and visitor analytics with conversion tracking. An agent can say "this page was fetched by a crawler, cited, and sent visitors who converted" only if all of that sits in one place.

How the others fit an agent workflow

AthenaHQ is the closest in spirit, with an Action Center of assignable tasks and GA4, Shopify and Webflow attribution. Our entry notes it has no published crawler logs and that credit-based billing is hard to predict. An agent running reports across many clients will burn credits you cannot forecast.

Scrunch AI lists crawler traffic analytics and an agent-experience layer that serves optimized pages to bots. Its reporting is the weak point: the top G2 complaint in our entry is that users export to Excel to build client charts. That is a human step an agent cannot take over cleanly.

Profound is positioned around marketing agents for content, demand and PR, and the self-serve Starter plan is ChatGPT-only. API and the broader engine set are Enterprise-gated, with contracts from about $40k a year. Agentic in marketing, but it ranks below the dedicated AI-search platforms for client reporting.

Semrush AI Toolkit offers mature reporting infrastructure that clients recognize. Costs add up quickly: $99/mo per domain, $99/mo per extra domain, $99/mo per extra user and $60/mo per 50 extra prompts. A ten-domain agency lands near $1,000/mo, per the entry, and the data stops at mentions, with no crawler logs or conversion attribution.

The trackers agencies already know

Otterly.AI and Peec AI are named in the title, so here they are, last as always.

Otterly.AI has no PDF export. Looker Studio export starts at Standard ($189/mo) and it integrates with Semrush. Data can be up to 7 days stale per our entry, which hurts an agent that is asked "what changed this week?"

Peec AI offers an Agency plan from $245/mo with a multi-client structure and white-label reporting. Each tier includes 3 models, and extra models are $35 to $165 per month each. It is monitoring-only, so an agent reading it can describe visibility but cannot explain it.

The report an agent should produce

Keep the structure fixed so month-over-month comparison works:

Scope and coverage. Prompts, engines, regions, competitors.
Visibility movement. What changed and which prompts drove it.
Citations. Pages and domains that AI engines used.
Crawler health. Which bots fetched what, and the errors.
Referred visits and conversions. The business result.
Actions taken and queued. What shipped, what is next.

A human reviews the narrative and signs off. The agent does the assembly.

Where to start

Pick one client, connect the MCP server, and have an agent draft this month's report from the structure above. If the draft needs no manual data pulling, the tool is doing its job. Start a Promptwatch agency trial here: https://promptwatch.com?ref=101seomedia. Browse the rest of the field in the full tool list.