Your clients are asking what AI says about them. Answer with evidence, not guesswork.
Public-affairs and communications agencies are being asked a new question by every client: how do AI assistants describe us, and what should we do about it? Eidoscore gives you a defensible answer: monitored prompts with ranges, community and public Telegram narratives, and a reviewed brief you can put your name on.
Why this lands differently here.
Every client is now asking a version of the same question: what do AI assistants say about us, and what should we do about it? The agencies that can answer with evidence are winning that conversation; the ones improvising are losing it.
The difficulty is defensibility. Language models return different answers to the same prompt on different days, so a single screenshot proves nothing and a single score invites a challenge you cannot answer. You need repeated runs, honest ranges, and the raw answers stored.
Running this across a portfolio adds its own problem. Client work has to stay separated, reporting has to carry your name rather than ours, and an account director needs to be able to defend the method in the room without a technical briefing first.
A client asks why last month's number moved, you cannot explain the variance, and the credibility you spent a year building on strategy is spent in a single meeting.
What teams use it for.
Concrete work, not a dashboard tour. Each job produces something a person can review, decide on and send.
Run monitoring across multiple client topics from one platform, with reviewer roles
Client-ready reporting: evidence links, scores and recommended actions in every brief
A methodology you can defend in the room: repeated runs, ranges, every raw answer stored
What we monitor for you.
The same engine, pointed at the signals that matter in your work rather than a generic mention feed.
Per-client workspaces
Separate topics, sources and reviewers for each client, with account-level reporting across the portfolio.
Method transparency
Repeated prompt runs, ranges rather than single scores, and every raw answer retained so any figure can be traced back.
Client-ready output
Briefs written for people who never open the platform, with evidence links, scores and recommended actions in each one.
Reviewer control
Named approvers per workspace and an audit trail behind every alert, so responsibility is always attributable.
A concrete example.
A client asks what AI assistants say about them, and why last month's answer differs from this month's. Eidoscore gives you separate client workspaces, ranges rather than a single shifting score, and a weekly brief your account team can stand behind.
Questions we hear from agencies and consultancies.
Can we run multiple clients?
Yes. Separate workspaces, reviewer roles and account-level reporting.
Can reports carry our brand?
Branded reporting is agreed per engagement.
Who does the analysis?
Eidoscore analysts review every flag. Your team owns the client relationship and the decisions.
What the weekly brief contains.
One reviewed document a week. Ten minutes to read, every claim linked back to its source.
EU-hosted. Public sources only. Topics and narratives, not individuals. Every action human-reviewed.