Your client sent ChatGPT SEO advice? Here’s how to respond

“Hi Frank, I had ChatGPT look at our SEO and it has a bunch of recommendations. Can you take care of this for us?”

Nearly every SEO professional has received some version of this email from a client or boss. Responding effectively requires navigating a minefield of professional dynamics. How do you avoid sounding defensive or dismissive? How do you explain that some AI suggestions are generic, flawed, or outright wrong without appearing territorial?

Knowing SEO is one thing. Knowing how to diplomatically address AI-generated recommendations is a completely different skill.

Resist the temptation to fire back with “ChatGPT is wrong.” That instinct may feel satisfying, but it typically backfires. It makes you sound territorial and shifts the conversation from SEO quality to your defensiveness.

Instead of debating the AI output, demonstrate your ability to evaluate it objectively and professionally. The first move is to acknowledge the effort behind the recommendations before dissecting their validity.

Don’t jump straight into your analysis. Start by thanking the person who forwarded it. Most people sharing ChatGPT output believe they are being helpful. They want to contribute ideas, move projects forward, or ensure nothing slips through the cracks. If your first reaction attacks the recommendations, they will hear you attacking their effort.

Here is how we opened a recent client response: “Hi Dr. _! Thanks for sending this over. There are a few ideas worth taking a look at. I also have some ideas on data we can give the model so it has more context. I’ll follow up with you afterward with more details.”

That response accomplishes several things: it acknowledges their effort, signals objective evaluation, and gives you room to separate useful ideas from flawed ones later. You are not admitting AI uncovered major issues you missed. You are showing willingness to review recommendations professionally before acting.

Follow up with what is worth exploring first. Do not lead with everything ChatGPT got wrong. Start with the ideas worth investigating. That demonstrates you evaluated the output objectively instead of dismissing it outright.

This is where you showcase expertise. Do not reject a recommendation simply because it came from AI. Assess whether the underlying observation is valid, whether it matters, and whether it is worth acting on.

For example, I recently reviewed AI-generated feedback on a page our team was working on. Had a client sent it over, an appropriate response would start with: “Thanks for sending this over. I took a look and there is some room to get some more Philadelphia-relevant content/language into this page while keeping it natural. I’ve assigned this to one of our copywriters to get started.”

Let the sender realize ChatGPT is wrong on their own. Once you have acknowledged the valid recommendations, you can address the weaker ones. The key is walking stakeholders through your reasoning rather than simply declaring the AI output incorrect.

For example, we received an AI-generated analysis from a plastic surgeon client claiming competitors had “focused their SEO” around a single procedure. Our response: “Hi Dr. _, Positioning you as the surgeon in your market for a specific procedure goes beyond SEO. This is a fundamental aspect of branding and positioning that could not only drive better user signals, resulting in better rankings, but higher conversion rates as well. I would note that if you visit these websites, however, you’ll see that they rank well for facelift queries even though they list many other procedures. I can’t figure out why the model is claiming that their SEO is focused on facelift. They are producing content beyond that procedure, as well. So if you decide to go all-in on positioning yourself around a specific procedure, it doesn’t mean we can’t list other procedures on the website, nor does it mean we’d be limited to writing only about that procedure. It would largely direct efforts on social media, outdoor, and areas outside of SEO and the website.”

Notice the approach: it acknowledges the valid strategic point, introduces contradictory evidence calmly, and allows the stakeholder to recognize the flaw independently. That is far more persuasive than simply saying “ChatGPT is wrong.”

Focus on improving the analysis, not debating the output. At some point, you need to explain the reality: AI outputs are only as good as the prompt and context they receive. In this case, our client provided no context, data, or guidance. He simply asked the model for SEO recommendations.

Continuing that client email: “…the model is recommending we add procedure pages in excess of 3,000+ words. Luckily, we already have all of these pages up, though our word counts do not exceed 3000. I checked this against the top-ranking results for these queries and found that almost all have word counts that are much lower than this, which reflects my experience that raw word count does not drive rankings. I think we should rerun this analysis and make a few changes to the prompt, including asking it to ignore word count. We should also ask the model to analyze these pages against ours and point out subtopics they cover that our pages have missed, entities they include that we don’t, and how the information density of our content compares to theirs. What do you think?”

Notice the shift. You are no longer arguing about whether ChatGPT is right or wrong. You are improving the quality of the analysis itself. That positions you as collaborative, analytical, and confident in your expertise instead of defensive.

These emails are not going away. Learn how to answer them. You will receive more and more of these from clients, executives, and internal stakeholders. Learning how to respond effectively will become an increasingly important part of SEO and marketing leadership.

The challenge is not just evaluating AI-generated recommendations. It is doing so in a way that keeps stakeholders engaged, reinforces your expertise, and does not consume unnecessary time and energy.

The next time you feel tempted to send AI-generated recommendations to your accountant, doctor, or IT department, remember what it feels like to be on the receiving end.