Attensira vs KIME

Why is this comparison different from the others?

Most pages in this section compare Attensira with a tool that measures AI answers and leaves the work to you. KIME is not that. Its homepage says that its agent, AWX, "executes those tasks, writing content, fixing technical structure and pursuing third-party placements". That is the same kind of promise Attensira makes, so the usual line, "they report, we do", would be false here. We will not use it.

KIME is at the edge of the answer; we are not in it yet. On 3 October 2026 Perplexity answered "best AI search visibility tools for agencies", one of the 61 questions we track for our own site, with Profound, Mangools AI Search Grader and BeOmniscient first, then KIME among "other notable options", with KIME's own blog post on AI visibility tools as a source. Attensira was not named. The chart below counts how often KIME is.

So this page compares two agent platforms on the things that decide whether an agent is safe and worth paying for: how much work you get, where it lands, who approves it, and how you find out whether it worked.

What does KIME sell?

KIME describes itself as "an AI visibility platform that tracks how AI models describe, rank and cite your brand". It says it tracks ten AI engines in one workspace: ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, Claude, Grok, DeepSeek, Copilot and Meta AI.

Its pricing page, read on 4 October 2026, listed:

• Explorer, €99 a month: 50 prompts tracked across 2 AI engines, unlimited workspaces, 5 seats, and AWX with 10 agentic executions a month.
• Core, €399 a month: 200 unique prompts across 3 engines, 10 seats, AWX with 30 agentic executions a month, onboarding support and extended account management.
• Enterprise, custom: a choice of all engines, 30 to 50 seats and 40 to 100 executions a month, with Slack support and quarterly workshops.

Both self-serve plans come with a seven-day trial that needs no card and no demo. Quarterly billing takes 5% off and annual 15%. KIME says there are no per-seat or per-model fees.

How does the work compare?

Volume. KIME counts its agent in agentic executions: 10 a month on Explorer, 30 on Core. The page does not define one, so we cannot say whether an execution is an article, a fix or a step. Attensira's Daily win plan does up to three pieces of work a day toward the questions you are losing, each a whole deliverable: a rewritten passage, an article, a pitch, a listing or a drafted reply. The work is paid in credits, and your monthly budget is shown as the work it buys, so many articles, page fixes and outreach pitches, before you agree to it.

Where it lands. KIME's pages do not say where AWX's changes are published. Attensira's do: a fix to a site in a Git repository becomes a pull request, opened as a draft by default, on a branch used once and never pushed twice; a site on Webflow or WordPress gets an unpublished draft in its own editor; a new article goes to a pull request, a CMS or Notion draft, or a copy to paste. Outreach goes from your own mailbox. Community replies are drafted for you to post.

Who approves. KIME's pages do not describe an approval step. Attensira's is public: workspaces start in Draft, where nothing leaves until you approve it; Act lets hygiene work, such as structured data and alt text, go on its own; and anything that states a claim, a price, a number, a product or competitor name, waits for a person in every mode.

Proof. KIME's pages do not describe how a change is measured. Attensira re-reads the questions each shipped change targeted at +7, +14 and +30 days, compares them with the week before, and states the sample size. "No change" and "too close to call" are verdicts.

None of this means KIME lacks these things; it means its public pages do not say. When you evaluate any agent that writes to your site, those four answers belong in writing before the trial ends.

What does a safe agent on your website look like?

Once a product writes to your site, the questions change. A tracker that gets something wrong shows you a wrong number. An agent that gets something wrong can publish a wrong price, a false claim about a competitor, or a broken page. So the design of the guard rails matters as much as the quality of the writing.

Here is what Attensira's look like, all from our public documentation.

• Every proposed change is classified from the diff itself, not from what the agent says about it. Hygiene, such as structured data, meta descriptions, alt text and internal links, is "safe". Anything with a price, a percentage, a promise word, a competitor's or product's name, or a sentence of prose is a "claim". Code, CI configuration, lockfiles and anything outside the directories you named are "never", refused even with approval.
• Claims wait for a person in every mode. Approving a claim is the only way it is published.
• Every draft is checked before anyone can approve it, against your compliance and voice rules and our house rules: no statistic or quotation without a named source a reader could check, no claimed improvement without the before-and-after numbers behind it.
• The repository connection asks for three permissions, contents, pull requests and metadata, and nothing else. The crew never pushes to your default branch and never pushes twice to a branch.

Ask any agent vendor for the same list. If the answers are not written down, you will be relying on goodwill when something goes wrong. That is true of us as much as anyone, which is why ours are public.

Where is KIME the better choice?

You want to start without a card. KIME's trial needs no card and no demo; ours takes a card.

You need many seats or workspaces at entry. Explorer includes unlimited workspaces and five seats, Core ten.

You need engines we do not read. KIME tracks ten in total, including Grok, DeepSeek, Copilot and Meta AI, though its self-serve plans read two or three of them. Compare that with the engines row above.

You think in euros and quarters. KIME bills in euros and discounts quarterly billing.

Where is Attensira the better choice?

Attensira is software that does your AI-search visibility work: whatever it takes to win the answer. It is the better choice when you want more work, done under rules you can read before you buy.

On volume, a crew that can do up to three pieces of work a day has a very different ceiling from ten executions a month, though your budget sets how much of that ceiling you use. On engines, our entry plan reads more of them than KIME's Explorer does; the engines rows above show both. On process, everything that matters to a cautious buyer is in our public documentation: the approval modes, the classes of change the crew may make on its own, the files it may never touch, the three permissions its GitHub App asks for, and the method behind every before-and-after.

How do the costs compare?

KIME's price is a fixed monthly fee per plan that includes prompts, engines, seats and a count of executions.

Attensira's price is credits-first. The plan fee includes monitoring and a monthly allowance of credits for agent work; agents spend credits as they work; your monthly budget caps what the work can be charged; and committed work we do not deliver is credited back on the first of the month.