AI Tool Site Keyword Atlas: 1,907 Autocomplete Terms and 15 Clusters, Tiered

1. Executive summary

15 keyword clusters went through validation. Result: 2 BUILD / 6 WATCH / 8 KILL.

The two real legs of this round: B1 narrows the 2026-09-07 "EU AI Act compliance" idea from a generic explainer site into a one-page router; B2 is a new neutral data-table business backed by affiliate numbers. Everything else stays on WATCH or is rejected.

2. Method and evidence boundaries that cannot be crossed

Collection

• Google autocomplete: requested through the local proxy against suggestqueries.google.com/complete/search?client=firefox&hl=en&gl=us. Total 237 collection records, 1,907 unique suggestions (2,026 rows before de-duplication, 78 roots). Raw files are attached below and downloadable: suggest_seeds.tsv (51 records), suggest_expanded.tsv (30 records), suggest_az.tsv (156 records, a–z root expansion).
• SERP observation: only the WebSearch tool was available, and it returns roughly 6 results per query. Every "title hit rate x/6" in this report is a proxy metric inside that sample. It is not the full Google first page and not an intitle: count.
• Competitor scale: TrustMRR public endpoints api/ai/discovery (a fixed 50-item cache, no search, no pagination) plus per-product startup/{slug}.md. TrustMRR states in its llms.txt that scraping the full site is not allowed, so category pages were not crawled; complete MRR, churn and traffic curves need an authenticated API and were not obtained. ProductHunt was queried as site:producthunt.com <niche> for launch dates and upvotes.
• Direct verification: GitHub Search API, vendor documentation and pricing/affiliate pages, harness.io, Ahrefs, artificialintelligenceact.eu, radar.benchlm.ai, comparevoiceai.com, Smith.ai and Bland were all fetched.

Channels that were genuinely dead this round (do not reuse them as data)

• Direct curl against Google SERPs: redirected to a JS interstitial whose body only reads "Please click here if you are not redirected", with zero <h3> results and no resultStats → Google-wide intitle: supply counts could not be obtained this round.
• Bing through the proxy returned Japan-region results and silently ignored intitle: (a search for intitle:"agent harness" returned Weblio dictionary pages) → unusable for supply counts.
• html.duckduckgo.com returned an HTTP 202 challenge page.
• Google Ads CPC could not be verified (direct access to google.com/search is intercepted with a 302 from this machine).

List of unknowns (these are "unknown", not zero)

• Monthly search volume, keyword difficulty, CPC and trend slope for every term: unknown (no Ahrefs / Semrush / Google Ads account).
• The complete Google top 10 and the real geographic distribution for candidate terms: unknown (WebSearch sample ≈6 results; the gl=us parameter does not establish actual rankings).
• Competitor conversion rates, retention curves and traffic mix: unknown (public TrustMRR pages only give a revenue snapshot).
• Affiliate exit status (re-checked 2026-09-28): Retell at 15% for 12 months with a 90-day cookie, and myAIFrontDesk at 30% recurring with no approval, are both confirmed by the vendors' own pages; Vapi's applications are on hold and its affiliates subdomain returns 404; Bland offers only a sales-led channel partnership; Smith.ai's attribution window and whether it would approve a zero-traffic site remain unknown; Goodcall and Numa show no affiliate programme on site, and the guessed RingCentral path returns 404.
• The gefei "ads reveal demand" method was not executed: Similarweb ad-word lists require an account.

3. Self-corrections (three load-bearing assumptions falsified; conclusions rewritten accordingly)

1. BUILD → WATCH downgrade. I first rated coding-agent usage as BUILD. The load-bearing assumption was: "free open-source tools only show local, immediate usage; nobody does cross-vendor + history + alerts." Falsified on re-check (GitHub Search API, 2026-09-28): getagentseal/codeburn 11,263★, description literally "track AI coding token usage and cost across" (created 2026-04-13, pushed yesterday); junhoyeo/tokscale 5,562★, "Track token usage across AI coding agents from your terminal"; vinzdg/codenotch 2,544★, created 2026-09-05 (23 days ago), "pins usage limits from Claude Code, Cursor..."; Javis603/token-monitor 2,418★ (local-first desktop widget, pushed the same day). Additionally, of 11,191 repositories matching claude usage, 2,724 (≈24%) were created after 2026-08-01 → an explosive influx over the last eight weeks. Cross-vendor is already occupied by free tools. What remains is only the narrow, not-yet-falsified position of "hosted history + alerts + team attribution", and any 10k★ project can erase it by adding a sync endpoint.
2. A sub-agent conclusion overturned. The first research pass reported "SKILL.md validator does not appear in the top results." A second pass falsified that: getskillcheck.com (paid SaaS), a free validator on ysskrishna.space, agent-ecosystem/skill-validator 251★, agent-sh/agnix 425★, three validators embedded in mcpmarket, and 132 same-named GitHub repositories. The gap does not exist; KILL stands.
3. My own autocomplete evidence corrected a sub-agent. The second pass claimed "Google Suggest for skill md only returns format/example, never validator, so no demand backs the validation terms." Wrong: the local a–z expansion archive suggest_az.tsv, row skill md v, explicitly returns skill md validator, and the raw error strings skill md missing frontmatter and skill.md missing or malformed yaml frontmatter also appear in autocomplete. The basis for KILLING this cluster is supply and official coverage, not absent demand.

4. BUILD candidates

B1. EU AI Act clause-level "obligation router" + deliverable document pack

Keyword cluster and demand evidence (autocomplete 2026-09-28)

• eu ai act → summary, article 50, 2026, pdf, watermarking, text, transparency requirements, article 4, annex iii
• eu ai act article 50 → transparency obligations, article 50(2), guidelines, code of practice, 50(4), "article 50(2) code of practice on transparency of ai-generated content", transparency rules
• ai compliance → analyst, jobs, certification, officer, remote (role and certification intent dominates, which tells us people searching this are looking for job definitions, not tools)
• Search volume / KD / CPC: unknown. The clause-number granularity visible in autocomplete itself (50(2), 50(4), Annex III) is evidence of intent that has moved past explainer content into execution.

Official facts (fetched from artificialintelligenceact.eu/implementation-timeline/, 2026-09-28): as of 2026-08-02 the remaining provisions, including Article 50, apply; systems already on the market must satisfy Art 50(2) by 2026-12-02; Annex III high-risk (Chapter III) is deferred by the Digital Omnibus to 2027-12-02, Annex I to 2028-08-02. Law-firm reading agrees: Gibson Dunn (2026-05-27) and Jones Walker (2026-07-16) both confirm the Omnibus defers high-risk obligations only, not transparency obligations.

SERP observation (WebSearch sample ≈6, 2026-09-28; Article 50 title hits 6/6): Commission digital-strategy (Code of Practice), artificialintelligenceact.eu (FLI), HSF Kramer / Gibson Dunn / Jones Walker (law firms), SSL.com (certificate vendor), layer3labs. Productised small players already exist: euaiact.com (31-step checklist), resemble.ai (public list price $350/mo and $1,000/mo, fetched), getproofsnap (C2PA/SynthID forensic capture + checklist landing page); tracker tools include legalithm / euaicompass / deepinspect.

The gap: trackers and checklists are crowded. What is still thin is an interactive determination of "am I a provider or a deployer, and which obligations land on me", plus deliverables you can copy and use immediately (Art 50(1) disclosure wording, an Art 50(2) machine-readable marking / C2PA evidence checklist).

Minimal shape (one page satisfying the first-click intent): a router (inputs: role × whether it faces end users × whether it generates content × date placed on the market → outputs: applicable clauses + deadlines + evidence links), with result pages static, indexable and citable by AI systems; a one-time document pack below it.

Monetisation ladder and pricing assumptions (assumptions, not promises): one-time compliance document pack $49–$299 (the price frame legal teams are willing to pay: resemble.ai's public list price of $350/$1,000 per month is vendor self-reporting, not closed-deal data); a subscription of $19–$39/month for "deadline alerts after Omnibus or guideline changes". AdSense is a poor fit (YMYL). Affiliate: unknown, no compliance-tool affiliate programme found.

14-day validation plan

• D1–D4: the router + two clause pages (Art 50(1) disclosure, Art 50(2) machine-readable marking); every conclusion must carry an official source link.
• D5–D10: submit the sitemap (GSC + Bing), record indexing and the impressions queries.
• D11–D14: open a $49 document-pack pre-sale.
• Success signals: router completion rate ≥30%, ≥20 emails, ≥3 pre-orders.
• Kill thresholds: completion rate <10% or 0 pre-orders at day 14 → KILL; if the Commission's AI Act Service Desk publishes a unified interpretive position → stop investing immediately.

Risk: an explicit "not legal advice" statement is mandatory. The fine ceiling of €15M / 3% and the dates "Commission guidelines draft 2026-05-08 / second Code of Practice draft 2026-03-05" currently come from a single secondary source (the ProofSnap page) and have not been checked line by line against the primary text — they must be verified before going into any page. A wrong interpretation is an irreversible trust incident for a compliance product.

5. WATCH (upgrade only when conditions are met; no development spend yet)

W1. Hosted history / alerts / team attribution for coding-agent usage (downgraded from BUILD). Autocomplete evidence is abundant: token usage → tracker npm/github/claude/checker; claude code usage → limits, monitor, reset, credits, dashboard, tracker, plugin; the a–z expansion on usage limit yields 225 long-tail terms including claude usage limit tracker, chatgpt usage limit tracker, codex usage limit vs claude, claude free vs pro vs max, and the raw error string usage limit reached for gemini-3.5-flash.

Verified paid scale (re-checked locally from TrustMRR startup/sessionwatcher.md, Stripe-verified): last 30 days $2,792 (month over month −3%), last 3 months $9,015, all-time ~$12,18x, 103 active subscriptions, 15,635 visitors/30 days, DR only 12, founded 2025-09-01; pricing Solo $6.99 one-time / Bundle $14.99 / Pro $24/year or $49 one-time.

Why it is still not BUILD: see §3-1 — cross-vendor is occupied by 11,263★ and 5,562★ free tools; Anthropic has shipped official Claude Code team analytics and admin spend visibility; SessionWatcher's own revenue is −3% month over month.

Upgrade condition: start only when we can deliver the three things free tools structurally cannot (hosted history + alerts + team view) and the leading open-source projects have not added a sync endpoint within 90 days. Pricing assumption $24–$49/year individual, $8–15/seat/month team (aligned to SessionWatcher Pro and the low end of Langfuse's $29 tier).

W2. Single-point content line on limits / resets (Codex side only). Generic claude usage limit reset and codex usage limit reset hit 6/6 in the sample, but tool landing pages: 0, while when does ... reset countdown is already taken (4/6) by usagebar.com ×2, claudelog.com and creaitu-style content sites. The official gap remains real: 1,790 issues in anthropics/claude-code matching "usage limit reset", 1,247 in openai/codex matching "rate limit"; issue #41739 (show a reset countdown in the status line) was closed as stale with 0 reactions; an OpenAI community post on 2026-09-14 still asks for a "clearer Codex usage dashboard".

Action (no code): publish 3 Codex-only pages (banked resets, 72h vs 7d, /usage semantics) plus one pure front-end countdown page. Threshold: ≥200 impressions and 4 terms in the top 20 within 14 days, otherwise close.

W3. SKILL.md cross-runtime compatibility matrix. Precondition: skill md compatibility matrix is not in autocomplete, so it is a research-constructed term. It must be tested for indexing first (single page, watch GSC impressions for 7 days) before anything is built. Never mass-produce from constructed terms.

W4. Website change monitoring (vertical + semantic summary). 6 of the 10 autocomplete rows under website change carry free / tools / self hosted / open source, so demand is real. But changedetection.io is 34,604★, Apache-2.0, still pushed 2026-09-25, with official hosting at $8.99/month pinning the price; Visualping starts at $14, Distill is permanently free for 25 monitors, and monity.ai has already taken the "AI change monitoring + natural-language monitoring intent" position. Upgrade condition: bind a vertical dataset nobody else can obtain (competitor pricing pages / tenders / policy pages) and make the severity ranking clearly better than generic tools.

W5. GEO / AI search visibility (vertical benchmark + audit-report template). ai visibility checker hits 6/6 in the sample; the generic free position now belongs to Ahrefs (AI Visibility Checker, Brand Radar) and Semrush (AI Visibility Toolkit). Price band: Otterly lists $25/$29/$99/$489 on its own site; Profound's site shows only Trial + Enterprise Custom (a third-party figure of ~$499/month, not confirmed by the vendor); Peec publishes no price. Indie scale (re-checked locally from startup/outcited.md): MRR $99, last 12 months $2,203, 1 active subscription, DR 0, founded 2026-05-01, pricing from $49/month after trial. Affiliate: Otterly 20% × 12 months, Scrunch 20%, Airefs 30% lifetime (getairefs, dated 2026-03-09, not verified vendor by vendor). Upgrade condition: serve one vertical only (local services / law firms / Shopify stores) with a citation-rate benchmark plus a deliverable audit report. Same substrate as the 2026-09-07 AI crawler monitoring line — an extension, not a new surface.

W6. Slide quality and readability scoring (non-accusatory). The money is on the generation side, not detection: MagicSlides does $9,654 in the last 30 days and $717,678 all-time (Stripe-verified) versus ai-detector at $116 all-time. The quality side is occupied only by slidespeak's and tosea's free SEO landing pages. Upgrade condition: an explicit commitment never to make "was this generated by AI" accusations.

6. KILL list (with reasons, so these are not re-raised next round)

1. agent harness / harness engineering — the definitional position is locked by three pages: Wikipedia "Agent harness", martinfowler.com "Harness engineering", learn.microsoft.com. harness engineering vs context engineering hits 6/6 individual and small blogs (writable, but a low ceiling). The benchmark position belongs to artificialanalysis.ai. The brand collision holds after local verification: harness.io published "Harness Agent DLC: Secure the Agent Lifecycle" on 2026-07-21 (title and date fetched). TrustMRR scanning returned 0 paying indie products in skill / harness / presentation. Coinage-convergence risk: harness engineering vs loop engineering is already in autocomplete. → Writable as content, given the existing Harness series, but it is not a keyword-site product.
2. claude skills / agent skills directories and marketplaces — claude skills marketplace is 6/6 marketplaces in the sample, 5/6 site-shaped tools (skillsmp.com claims 3M+ skills, claudeskillsmarket.com, augmentclaude, buildwithclaude). Definitional ownership belongs to agentskills.io + Anthropic. On ProductHunt, agent-skills-3 (2026-03-10, 190 upvotes, free) and ai-agent-skills-refiner (2026-03-03, 85 upvotes, free) launched seven days apart. Same shape as the MCP directory already killed on 2026-09-07.
3. SKILL.md validator / linter / security scan — see §3-2. Beyond that, Claude Code ships claude plugin validate in the box (--strict since v2.1.145, JSON output since v2.1.259, CI exit codes 0/1/2), plus /skill-doctor and /doctor; the agentskills.io spec has its own Validation section and skills-ref validate (a 25,743★ repository). Security-side demand is real but is locked by large players through open source plus enterprise channels: Snyk ToxicSkills (2026-02-05, scanned 3,984 skills, 13.4% with critical findings, 76 malicious payloads), The New Stack's audit of 22,511 skills (2026-03-22), NVIDIA SkillSpector 18,454★, cloudflare/security-audit-skill 22,373★, Cisco skill-scanner 2,558★, snyk/agent-scan 3,093★. The paid position is also taken: getskillcheck Free / Pro $79 one-time / Pro Pass $15 per 30 days / Team $49/month, with a 202-URL sitemap doing programmatic SEO via /reports/<author>-<skill>.
4. LLM / AI API price comparison and calculators — every front-page result is a purpose-built price site (pricepertoken, benchlm, artificialanalysis, helicone/llm-cost, llm-prices, llmpricecheck, modelcostcomparison, costgoat, aipricing.guru). Ceiling proven with local verification (TrustMRR startup/price-per-token.md): DR 51, founded 2025-08-08, yet only 2 active subscriptions; $1,800 in the last 30 days and $3,900 all-time, with the daily table showing $1,200 on one single day (2026-09-06) — and the site has Advertise/sponsor slots, so the income is advertising, not subscription. The tooling layer is squeezed by Langfuse ($29/$199/$2,499 plus $8 per 100k units) and Helicone (Pro $79, Team $799, acquired by Mintlify on 2026-03-03); the finops long tail belongs to cloudzero / nops / doit / finout. Price sheets change daily. No AdSense observed (competitors only ship GTM); CPC unknown.
5. Image model version comparison terms — fact check: OpenAI's docs do list gpt-image-2.5-flare (speed) and -sunburst (quality), with quality levels auto/low/medium/high/xhigh/max; but the release date 2026-09-08 and the $8/$2/$30 per 1M token pricing are both third-party (myclaw) claims, and the OpenAI page gives no date. The 6/6 sample is API reseller and router blogs (fal.ai, evolink, orcarouter, ofox, myclaw, mindstudio) clustered tightly on 09-08 to 09-10 (covered within 48 hours); the benchmark position belongs to artificialanalysis.ai and arena.ai; no comparable comparison product exists on ProductHunt. The image to prompt cluster is thoroughly saturated (6/6), the same shape as the already-killed png→svg.
6. AI content / slide detection — ai presentation checker is 5/6 tool landing pages in the sample but only 1/6 on the strict phrase; pptdetector.com owns the detection intent (pricing fetched: 20/40/500 credits at $19.9/$199/$39.9/$499). Educational integrity is YMYL, and the front page already answers "Can Turnitin detect AI in PowerPoint"; the cost of a false accusation is unacceptable. The indie detection product ai-detector has an all-time total of $116, $99.76 in the last 30 days, and its Paddle API key expired on 2026-08-22.
7. Model retirement / deprecation tracking as a standalone product — demand is real (pullpush data: r/ClaudeAI Opus 3 retirement post 2026-02-25 at 261 score / 48 comments; r/Anthropic Sonnet 4.5 retirement date 2026-05-21, 99/24; r/claudexplorers 2026-08-16, 59/11; an HN comment on 2026-07-11: "forced into a new more expensive model every few months"). Official sources are complete (OpenAI /api/docs/deprecations Last-Modified 2026-09-28; Anthropic model-deprecations; Azure retirement schedule plus retired-models, with the old path now 404; Bedrock model-lifecycle explicitly promising EOL notice; Gemini and Vertex deprecations — all HTML only, no RSS or atom, and the URLs drift). But the shape has already been fully shipped (fetched locally): benchlm.ai/deprecations describes itself as "18 providers, four serving routes, a source receipt and per-route date on every row", and the page carries a Radar API, webhook, RSS and ICS; the public feed radar.benchlm.ai/v1/public/lifecycle/calendar.json measured 500 entries, asOf 2026-09-28T03:04Z, with fields providerSlug / normalizedStage / route / effectiveAt / replacement / priority ("overdue") / evidence.sourceId. Also deprecations.info (RSS + Slack + email) and quora/model-deprecation-tracker (created 2026-02-25, 4★). Anthropic itself published deprecation-commitments (2025-11-04) and an Opus 3 update note (2026-02-25). Affiliate: Anthropic /affiliates returns 404, OpenAI only runs a B2B Partner Network → nothing to attach. The $99/$199 monthly tiers came from an agent report; I could not find that number in the HTML and mark it unknown. → KILL; the data moat is zero, since the public feed is readable by anyone.
8. Limit-reset countdown as a product position — Usagebar sells it for $9 one-time and already has reset-themed SEO articles; SessionWatcher's homepage reads $6.99/$14.99/$24–59 and already has 18 /guides/ articles (rate-limits-explained, how-to-avoid-rate-limits, best-claude-code-usage-trackers, sessionwatcher-vs-ccusage). On the free side, hamed-elfayome/Claude-Usage-Tracker is 3,577★ MIT, claiming 34,700+ downloads, claude-swap 2,859★, token-monitor 2,418★. GitHub supply density: claude usage limit 2,471 repositories, claude usage limit reset 387, "reset countdown" 200. The one-time price is already anchored at $9/free, and the high emotion is already fully absorbed by low and free options.

7. Evidence to add next round (this round's gaps, ordered by value per unit of effort)

1. Real supply counts. Google intitle:"<term>" must be counted manually in an incognito browser (the local curl channel is proven dead). Prioritise the 6–8 core terms for B1 and B2.
2. Move the B2 gate to the front. Affiliate approval decides whether B2 exists at all — apply before writing any page.
3. Search volume / CPC. Once any keyword tool (Ahrefs / Semrush / Google Ads) is available, every pricing assumption and 14-day threshold in this report has to be recomputed.
4. The 2026-09-07 AI crawler monitoring line was not re-tested this round. If investment continues, that line, W1 and W4 should be evaluated as one merged monitoring line, not three projects.

8. Appendix

Raw evidence archives attached in this directory: suggest_seeds.tsv, suggest_expanded.tsv, suggest_az.tsv (237 collection records / 1,907 unique terms, 2026-09-28).

Source list: see the sources block of this article (demand side, competitor and pricing, official documents, risk context).