The 30-second version
On June 7, 2026, Google published official documentation on third-party SEO tools, services and advice. The message: these tools have no access to Google's internal ranking data and can't guarantee any result. Difficulty scores, "domain authority", ranking probability: these are proprietary estimates, not Google figures. The only official source remains Google Search Console.
Direct answer: no, no third-party SEO tool (not Ahrefs, not Semrush, not any other) has access to Google's ranking data, and no agency can be "certified" or "approved" by Google. It's now written in the search engine's official documentation. The scores these tools show stay useful as comparative indicators, but they don't reflect the algorithm's real signals.
On June 7, 2026, Google published a new page on its Search Central, titled "guidance on using third-party SEO tools, services, and advice." Alongside it, the company also updated its long-standing "Do You Need an SEO?" page. The change was spotted and confirmed by Search Engine Land the same day.
What Google says, word for word
The document's core line is unambiguous: "Third-party tools don't have access to our internal ranking data. They can't guarantee performance." Google adds that some users "misinterpret" these tools' data as if it came directly from the search engine.
The company also warns against approval claims: "Google doesn't evaluate third-party services, so be wary of such claims and those making them." And on the page about hiring a provider, the warning is even more direct: "If they guarantee you that their changes will give you first place in search results, find someone else."
The document explicitly covers every common use of these tools: sitemap generation, indexing directives, "SEO-optimized" content, ranking improvements for existing pages, and, new in this edition, AI optimization services, i.e. the AEO and GEO that Google now files under SEO.
The score trap: how to read them correctly
The most widespread mistake is treating a "keyword difficulty" of 47 or a "domain authority" of 62 as a truth carved by Google. They're only statistical models built by each vendor from public data and in-house crawls. Two tools often return two different scores for the same page: proof that none of them reads the algorithm.
| Data point | From Google? | What it's for |
|---|---|---|
| Impressions, clicks, average position (Search Console) | Yes: official source | Measuring real performance |
| "Keyword difficulty", "Domain authority" | No: proprietary estimate | Comparing opportunities |
| Estimated search volume | No: vendor model | Prioritising, order of magnitude |
| "Ranking probability" / guarantees | No: ignore | No reliable use |
Are your SEO scores telling the truth about your visibility? We hand you a diagnostic built on your real data (Search Console and presence in AI answers), not a marketing score.
What it changes for SMEs
For a business owner, this document is a protection tool. It finally gives an official reference to tell a good provider from a seller of promises. Many SMEs have signed "guaranteed #1 on Google" engagements. Google has now officially labelled that pitch a red flag.
In practice, three reflexes become priorities. First, require that all reporting rests on Search Console, not only a third-party tool's dashboards. Then, ask your provider to back every recommendation with an official Google source or with measured experience data. Finally, properly connect your Search Console to also track your visibility inside AI Overviews.
What to do now
- Check your contracts. Any "ranking guarantee" clause is, per Google itself, a reason to switch providers.
- Recenter reporting on official data. Search Console for Google; plus dedicated tracking for business queries where AI Overviews already capture most answers.
- Keep third-party tools, in their right place. Excellent for exploring keyword ideas and comparing opportunities; never as a verdict on what Google "thinks."
The Cicéro take
This page changes nothing fundamentally: serious professionals have long known no tool reads the algorithm. What changes is that there's finally an official, citable reference to remind a client of it, or to disqualify a salesperson's pitch. It's exactly the lens we apply at Cicéro: every recommendation is framed as an opinion based on data and experience, or backed by Google's official documentation, never as a magic guarantee. Agency-quality work, software-grade productivity, and zero promises no one can keep.
Sources
- → Google Search Central: official documentation "guidance on using third-party SEO tools, services, and advice" (published June 7, 2026)
- → Google Search Central: "Do You Need an SEO?" (updated page)
- → Search Engine Land: coverage from June 7, 2026
Frequently asked questions
Do third-party SEO tools have access to Google's ranking data?
No. Google states it plainly in its June 7, 2026 documentation: "Third-party tools don't have access to our internal ranking data. They can't guarantee performance." Difficulty, authority and ranking-probability scores are each vendor's proprietary estimates.
Can a tool or an agency be "approved" by Google?
No. Google states it "doesn't evaluate third-party services" and warns against any claim of official approval. If a provider guarantees first place, Google explicitly recommends you "find someone else."
Which SEO data source does Google recommend?
Google Search Console, its first-party tool, which provides "key information and data directly from Google Search itself." It's the only source that reflects your impressions, clicks and positions as Google actually measures them.
Should you stop using Ahrefs or Semrush?
No. These tools remain excellent for exploring keywords, comparing opportunities and tracking trends. The trap is treating their scores as Google data. Use them as a compass, not a verdict.
What this article doesn't cover
This Google document is about SEO tools, services and advice in general. It publishes no new ranking criteria and is not an algorithm update. It also doesn't name "good" or "bad" tools: Google names no one. Finally, the difficulty and authority numbers cited here (47, 62) are illustrative examples, not values measured on a specific site.
Growth and SEO content strategist, I founded Cicéro to help businesses build lasting organic visibility, on Google and in AI-generated answers alike. Every piece of content we produce is designed to convert, not just to exist.
LinkedIn