Okara, Seology, or an Agency: Who Should Fix Your Technical SEO?
How we think about the choice between Okara and Seology shipping fixes as pull requests, and hiring an agency to run the whole program, including the measurement.
Technical SEO used to be a human with a crawler and a spreadsheet. In 2026 it is also an agent that opens pull requests in your repo. Two of the better options in that second category are Okara and Seology, and the third option is hiring an agency like ours to run the whole program. This is a balanced comparison, not a pitch. We run client work on Promptwatch, the platform we run client programs on, and we use it to measure whether a fix actually raised citations. The fix layer and the measurement layer are different jobs, and the choice below depends on which job you need done.
Okara: fixes as code in your repo
Okara is an AI CMO platform whose Coding Agent ships technical SEO and GEO fixes as GitHub pull requests. The fixes are real code, JSON-LD schema, llms.txt, canonicals, meta descriptions, head tags, not a render-time JavaScript overlay. Every fix batch lands as one pull request with a plain-English explanation and a diff you review and merge. Nothing applies without your approval, and a standard git revert undoes any merged change. GEO fixes, llms.txt, FAQ schema, and AI-readable content structure for ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini run alongside the traditional SEO checks, not as a separate purchase.
Pricing: Free AI CMO at $0 covers analysis and strategy only, no Coding Agent. AI CMO Lite is $129 per month, or $108 per month annual, with the SEO and Coding agents and 15 AI search prompts tracked. AI CMO Pro is $249 per month, or $208 per month annual, with every agent. The Coding Agent is on the paid plans.
The strength is that the fix is real code with git history. The limitation is that Okara does not publish AI crawler log tracking, citation analytics, or visitor conversions. It fixes the site so AI engines can read it. It does not tell you whether they then cite you.
Seology: a clean split between auto-fixable and flagged
Seology runs 200+ checks across technical SEO, on-page, structured data, Core Web Vitals, indexation, and GEO visibility for ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, and Gemini. It classifies each issue into an auto-fixable bucket, meta titles and descriptions, canonicals, alt text, schema markup, redirect chains, robots directives, Open Graph, hreflang, and a flagged bucket for content gaps, internal linking, E-E-A-T, and topic clusters. It has three modes: Monitor, Co-pilot, and Autopilot. Autopilot opens PRs automatically, which needs a real review habit to stay safe. Platforms cover Shopify, WordPress, Webflow, Wix, Squarespace, and custom sites.
Pricing: Starter is free for 1 site with 50 auto-fixes per month. Pro is $49 per month for 5 sites, daily scans, unlimited fixes, GEO optimization, and API access. Enterprise is custom and contact-led.
The strength is the clean split between deterministic fixes the agent ships and judgment calls it flags. The limitation is the same as Okara: no published AI crawler log tracking, citation analytics, or visitor conversions. Seology is the fix layer. It is not the measurement layer.
An agency: the fix layer plus the measurement layer
An agency like ours runs the whole program. We scope the prompt list, we read the crawler logs, we coordinate the fixes, and we measure whether the fixes raised citations. The fix work that Okara and Seology automate is work we can do, and on some retainers we use those tools to do it faster. The part we add that a fix tool cannot is the closed loop: did the fix change what the AI engine cited, and did that citation drive traffic.
We run that measurement on Promptwatch. Agent Analytics records the AI crawlers, ChatGPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, GoogleOther, and the Meta AI crawler, and traces the crawl-to-citation path. Citation analytics shows which pages the engines actually cite, with page-level, domain-level, Reddit, YouTube, and offsite citations broken out by type, so we can tell whether a fix moved the surface the client cares about or just moved the total. Visitor analytics closes the loop to AI-referred traffic and conversions, tracked through a lightweight script or a GTM template. The fix tool ships the canonical. We watch whether the canonical made the page get crawled and cited, and then whether the citation sent traffic. That is the difference between fixing technical SEO and running a GEO program.
When each fits
Okara fits a team that already works in git and wants fixes as code, with a human reviewing every PR. The pull-request workflow means rollback is a standard git revert, which is the part a developer-led team tends to like. Seology fits a smaller team that wants a clean audit and deterministic fixes at a low entry price, and is disciplined enough to keep Autopilot from shipping without review. The free Starter plan covers one site with 50 auto-fixes per month, which is enough to find out whether the deterministic bucket matches your stack before you pay. An agency fits a team that wants the fix layer and the measurement layer run together, with a human who owns the prompt list, the crawl diagnosis, and the publish button.
The honest answer is that these are not always substitutes. On retainers we have run Okara or Seology for the fix layer and Promptwatch for the measurement layer, and the two together answer more than either alone. The choice is not which one. The choice is which job you need done today: fix the site, or measure whether the fix moved the citation.
If you want help deciding, or you want the fix layer and the measurement layer run as one program, write to us at hello@1001seomedia.com. We will scope the prompt list, pull the crawler logs, and tell you whether a fix tool is enough or whether you need the loop closed.