My Questions takes up to five seed keywords, pulls real Google questions your audience searches along with answers from authoritative sources, and saves each run as a report you can revisit — built for repeatable content and FAQ planning.
🔎 Open My Questions Use the results →Where Question Finder is quick one-off discovery from a single keyword, My Questions is a saved research workflow. It accepts up to five seed keywords at once, returns questions with answers drawn from authoritative sources, and keeps every run as a report — so you build a research library over time rather than starting from scratch each session.
Enter up to five keywords describing your niche — for example "schema markup seo", "answer engine optimization", "local seo restaurants". More seeds give broader coverage; fewer give tighter focus.
Each run pulls fresh question-and-answer data for your seeds. Because it uses live Google data, re-running periodically surfaces newly trending questions in your niche.
Every run is saved with its date. Open any past report to review the questions and answers, or export to CSV. Your seeds are saved too, so re-running is one click.
The answers from authoritative sources are a starting point, not finished copy — use them to understand what a good answer covers, then write your own. Turn each question into an FAQ entry, a section heading, or a standalone post. Pair with the AEO Checker to confirm your published answers are structured for answer engines.
A question research run returns more questions than you can act on, and the failure mode is obvious once you have seen it happen: somebody publishes a page for each one. Three hundred short pages, one question each, four hundred words apiece.
That is thin content, and it does specific, measurable damage. Google crawls a sample, finds the pages insufficient, and declines to index the rest — so the majority of what you published never enters the index at all. Worse, a large volume of weak pages is itself an assessment of the site. Publishing more of them makes the problem deeper, not shallower.
| Question type | Where it goes | Test |
|---|---|---|
| Answerable in a paragraph | An FAQ entry on an existing page | Could a knowledgeable person answer it in 60 words? |
| Needs 300–800 words and examples | A section within a larger guide | Does it belong under a topic you already cover? |
| Genuinely a topic in its own right | Its own page | Can it carry real depth — steps, numbers, pitfalls, edge cases? |
Most questions are the first kind. Very few are the third. The discipline is in clustering: ten related questions become one strong page that answers all ten, rather than ten weak pages that answer one each. The strong page ranks, gets linked, and can be cited. The ten weak pages compete with each other and with nothing else.
An answer engine is not reading your page. It is looking for a passage it can lift out that answers a specific question. Whether your content is quotable is largely a structural property, and it is one you control.
Building to the answer. "Before we can understand CLS, we need to consider the history of web performance metrics…" — the answer is in there, four paragraphs down, wrapped in context. A human might reach it. An extraction system will take a cleaner passage from somebody else's page, and the citation goes to them.
The page above says the answers are a starting point rather than finished copy. That is worth being blunt about, because the temptation is considerable and the consequences are real.
The correct use of a retrieved answer is diagnostic. Read it and ask: what does a complete answer to this question have to cover? Then check whether it covered it. The gaps in the ranking answer are the reason your page will be better — and they are usually easy to find, because the incumbent is often vague exactly where being specific would be useful.
The raw list is not the insight. What matters is what the phrasing tells you.
Keeping past runs is only useful if you compare them. The value is in the diff, not the snapshot.
A quarterly cadence is a sensible default for most topics, and a monthly one for anything moving fast. What makes the library pay is that it is a record you can read backwards — the second run is worth more than the first, and the sixth is worth more than the second.
Publishing an answer and assuming it worked is how content programmes run for years without evidence. Three checks, none of which require a tool:
No. Most questions are answerable in a paragraph and belong in an FAQ section on an existing page; a few need a section within a larger guide; very few are genuinely topics in their own right. Publishing a short page per question produces exactly the thin content Google crawls a sample of, judges insufficient, and then declines to index the rest of — so most of what you publish never enters the index, and the volume of weak pages becomes an assessment of the whole site. Cluster ten related questions into one strong page instead.
Put the question verbatim in a heading, phrased the way people actually ask it, and answer it directly in the first sentence beneath — complete in roughly forty to sixty words, standing on its own without the surrounding paragraphs. Then add the depth: mechanism, numbers, exceptions, worked examples. An extraction system is looking for a passage it can lift out; a page that builds to its answer over four paragraphs has an answer that cannot be lifted.
No. They belong to whoever wrote them, and close paraphrasing produces a page that says what many other pages already say and has no reason to be preferred. Use a retrieved answer diagnostically — to establish what a complete answer must cover — then write your own, filling the gaps the incumbent left. The specifics you know and they do not are the only real advantage you have.
The ones phrased as problems. "Why won't my schema validate" is a person who has already tried and failed and needs a specific fix; "what is schema" is a person who may never return. Watch the verb: "what is" is orientation, "how do I fix" is an active problem, "X vs Y" is comparison shortly before a decision, and "best X for Y" is someone in the market now. The same topic supports all four and each needs a different page.
If your customers ask it on the phone and no tool reports it, that is usually not a low-demand question — it is a question nobody has published a good answer to, so nobody clicks, so no data accumulates. Those pages are the ones that get cited, because they are the only source. Zero reported volume frequently means "below the reporting threshold" rather than "nobody asks this".
Quarterly for most topics, monthly for fast-moving ones — and the value is in comparing runs rather than reading any single one. New questions appearing mean something changed in the world and no established answer exists yet, which is the least competitive page you will ever publish. Questions disappearing mean a page you own is losing its audience. Changes in how people phrase a question mean pages written against the old phrasing have quietly stopped matching.
Five seeds, real questions with answers, saved as reports. Pay as you go.
Open My Questions →aiwebpageseo.com is a data-driven SEO and AEO (Answer Engine Optimisation) platform providing a free suite of technical website tools. Rather than relying on AI-theorised assumptions, the platform analyses live URL performance, delivering objective diagnostics, page speed metrics, CLS debugging, and site crawl data alongside actionable technical tutorials.