Last verified: October 7, 2026
What You Can Now Do
Context Memo now shows citation counts, traffic metrics, and performance data broken down by individual memos or pages in the Problem Graph, with configurable time windows and all-time performance as the default view. Before this, the Problem Graph gave you the aggregate picture: coverage, gaps, movement. It did not tell you which asset earned the citation. Now each row carries its own numbers, so you can rank your published knowledge assets by what models actually pulled and what readers actually reached. The decision this changes is the one your team makes every week: which memo to update, expand, or clone next, and which published page is quietly doing nothing.
Where It Is in Context Memo
Open the Problem Graph. The segment control at the top of the view filters to Pages, Memos, or both, and each row now shows citation and traffic figures next to the problem it maps to. The time selector defaults to all-time. Switch it to a custom window when you need to isolate a campaign period, a publish batch, or the weeks following a positioning fix.
How to Use It
- Open the Problem Graph and set the segment to Memos. You get a memo-level list with citations and AI traffic attributed to each individual memo.
- Keep the window on all-time and sort by citations. The top rows are the assets carrying your visibility. The bottom rows are published content that models are passing over.
- Switch the segment to Pages. The same metrics apply to your tracked pages, which tells you whether non-memo content on your domain is earning citations or whether memos are doing all the work.
- Narrow the time window to the period since your last publish batch. Compare that ranking against the all-time ranking to see whether new memos are landing or whether older assets are still holding the account up.
- Set the segment to both, then look for problems where neither a memo nor a page is producing citations. Those are your gaps. Queue memos against them and re-check the same window after the next scan cycle.
Why We Built It
Customers kept telling us the same thing: they could not see which specific memos or pages were generating citations and traffic. Program-level numbers proved the channel worked, but they could not show the impact and reach of an individual knowledge asset. So publishing decisions got made on instinct. Teams rewrote memos that were already cited and left dead assets in place, which is wasted production effort on a channel where the asset that earns the citation is the only thing that matters.
What It Does Not Do Yet
- Segmentation covers Pages and Memos. Per-model and per-prompt attribution is not in this view; model-level answer detail still lives in your scan results.
- Rows populate only for memos published through Context Memo and pages tracked in your account. If a page is not in the graph, add it before expecting numbers against it.
- This view attributes citations and AI traffic. It does not report pipeline or revenue, and it is not a replacement for your CMS or marketing automation reporting, which have far more functionality for full-funnel analysis.
- Accounts with little published content will see sparse rows. The metrics describe reach that already exists; they do not create it. Brands early in building domain authority should expect thin data until a base of memos is live and crawled.