Skip to content
BirchSeek
Start setup

Hours back on every article.

BirchSeek writes SEO articles for your site. It reads your Google Search Console data to find the queries you already rank just below, drafts up to two articles at a time, and publishes only what you approve.

One article, end to end
You: 4 approvals
  1. Search
  2. Draft
  3. Verify claims
  4. +5 more
You

Every factual claim opens to a source. Nothing publishes until you approve it.

Monthly
30 articles
Price
$99
Start with BirchSeek
Pipeline - acme.com12/30
In review

How to choose a CRM in 2026

2,140 words · 14 claims · 14 sourced

First CRMs rarely stick: 38% of small teams replace their first CRM within two years - which changes what a comparison page owes a reader who has already been burned once…

Citation 1

Claim: 38% of small teams replace their first CRM within two years

Source: example.com/research/crm-replacement-2026

verified

Draft approved

Illustrative board. Sources shown use example.com.

How it works

  1. Connect

    Add your site, Search Console, and a publishing target: GitHub, Webhook, WordPress, Ghost, Webflow, Shopify, Wix, Notion, GoHighLevel.

    Read-only search access

  2. Choose

    See queries where you already rank 11 to 30, scored from their impressions and their distance from page one.

    QueryPositionImpressionsOpportunity
    best crm for small teams12.73,12087
    crm migration checklist11.22,40474
    crm vs spreadsheets18.01,10861

    You queue every topic

  3. Frame

    Review intent, angle, sources, and outline before drafting starts.

    Brief approval required

  4. Verify

    Edit the article, open every citation, and inspect the quality findings. Unsourced claims cannot pass review.

    Draft approval required

  5. Handoff

    Open a pull request or create a CMS draft, its sources listed in the body.

    Publish approval required

How it works, in full

Citations for every factual claim

Draft preview

Most CRM buyers are not buying their first CRM. 38% of small teams replace their first CRM within two years. The reader landing on your comparison page has already lived through one migration, and knows exactly what they are checking for.

They also don't read the way the page assumes: only 12% of buyers read a comparison page end to end. The rest scan for the row that decides it.

The sources do not stop at review. By default the article published to your own site ends with a plain ## Sources list pairing each verified claim with the page it was checked against, so your reader can open it instead of taking your word for it. One project setting turns that block off for a site that prints its own reference list. It carries the links, never the excerpts: only one of the four ways a claim passes proves an excerpt is on the page, in another there is no excerpt to print, and a reader has no way to tell which one answered.

[1]38% of small teams replace their first CRM within two years

verified

example.com/research/crm-replacement-2026

Writer's excerpt. Among teams of fewer than 25 people, 38% had replaced their first CRM within two years of adopting it.

Found in the page's own text.

[2]only 12% of buyers read a comparison page end to end

verified

example.org/2026/comparison-page-behaviour

Writer's excerpt. Just 12% of visitors to a vendor comparison page read it end to end; the rest scan for the row that matches their constraint.

Not matched word for word. A passage of the page overlapped it closely enough to pass.

Verified says a check confirmed the claim at that page, and the claim records which check answered. Three checks run and they settle into four different facts: only a word-for-word match proves the writer's excerpt is on the page, and where the writer asserted no excerpt that same match proves only the claim's own wording is there. Nothing confirmed is flagged amber, a page that could not be read at all red.

Illustrative. Every claim records how it was checked, and the pull request prints that note under each one. Sources above use the reserved example.com domain.

Your article arrives as a pull request

BirchSeek writes MDX with frontmatter matched to your content schema, ending in a Sources list that pairs every verified claim with the page it was checked against, then opens the pull request against your content repo. The request body lists those claims again for whoever merges, and says how each one was confirmed.

See the GitHub integration →

acme / website

Add article: how-to-choose-a-crm.mdx #128

Openbirchseek wants to merge 1 commit into main from birchseek/how-to-choose-a-crm

Verified sources: 6 claims checked against the page they cite

src/content/blog/how-to-choose-a-crm.mdx+214−0
1+---
2+title: "How to choose a CRM in 2026"
3+description: "A buyer's guide built on what the data actually says."
4+publishDate: "2026-07-17"
5+tags: [crm, buying-guides]
6+---
7+
8+First CRMs rarely stick: 38% of small teams replace
9+their first CRM within two years.

All checks have passed - preview deploy ready

Ready to merge in GitHub

Where BirchSeek publishes

Planned

Framer

One plan, $99 a month

$99a month

  • 30 articles a month
  • A source for every factual claim
  • Opportunities from your Search Console
  • 12 publishing connectors, all included
  • Unlimited edits and re-drafts
  • English only
Start for $99/month

Questions

Why is there no free trial?

Research and generation cost money per article, so there is one paid plan: $99 for 30 articles a month.

Isn't this just AI slop?

Every draft passes enforced citation checks (a factual claim without a source fails review), an originality lint that flags AI patterns and repetition, and four approval gates: topic, brief, draft, publish.

Where do the keyword ideas come from?

Mostly from your own Google Search Console data: queries your site already ranks 11 to 30 for, each scored from its impressions and how far it sits from page one. BirchSeek also proposes phrases from your brand context. Both sets are ranked together, and you pick the ones that run.

What exactly lands in my repo or CMS?

For GitHub: an MDX file with frontmatter matched to your content schema, opened as a pull request. For WordPress, Ghost, Webflow, Shopify, Wix, Notion and GoHighLevel: a draft created over their official APIs. For webhooks: a signed JSON payload to your endpoint. Every one of those is a publish to your own site, and by default every one ends with a Sources list pairing each verified claim with the page it was checked against. That block is a project setting, append_sources_section, on unless you set it to false, kept for a site whose house style prints its own reference list. A cross-post to dev.to, Hashnode or Medium never carries it: that one ships the draft body as written, under a canonical link back to the page that has the list.

Who owns the content?

You retain your rights in the material you provide and the articles BirchSeek generates for you.

What happens to unused articles?

Your quota resets at the start of each billing period.

Can it publish automatically?

No. Every article needs your approval before it publishes.

What do I need to get started?

A website and an active subscription. Search Console and a publishing target are optional; they add search-data research and direct delivery.

Start with BirchSeek.

30 cited articles a month.

Start for $99/month