Rescan Report
Share Report
Copy Report Link
Rescan Report
Share Report
Copy Report Link
Export Report
55/100

OVERALL SCORE

Level 3, Bot-Aware

Moderate readiness for AI agents
AIDiscoverability54%Agent Easeof Use53%Security& Trust78%GEO, AIO, AEO53%SEO100%Performance50%Accessibility46%
  • AI Discoverability 54 out of 100
  • Agent Ease of Use 53 out of 100
  • Security & Trust 78 out of 100
  • GEO, AIO and AEO 53 out of 100
  • SEO 100 out of 100
  • Performance 50 out of 100
  • Accessibility 46 out of 100

CAPTURED SCREENSHOT

Captured website desktop screenshot

What AI sees of your website

Ko-fi | Make money doing what you love favicon

Ko-fi | Make money doing what you love

Join 1,000,000+ creators! Set up your free page to get tips, sell products, offer memberships, and grow your community.

Next step

Turn this report into a fix workflow

2 failed checks are ready to move into MCP or CLI remediation. Generate a repair prompt, connect the scanner to your coding agent, or open the integration docs before your next rescan.

Detailed report scores grouped by capability area
MetricScoreStatusPassedFailedWarningEvidence
AI Discoverability
54
Needs work2321View details
Discoverability
48
Priority fix500
Content Readiness
50
Needs work1300
Bot Access Control
63
Needs work521View details
Agent Ease of Use
53
Needs work200
Google Agentic Browsing
66
Needs work200
GEO, AIO and AEO
53
Needs work500
GEO Readiness
Not Applicable
Not Applicable100
AIO Readiness
Not Applicable
Not Applicable200
AEO Readiness
Not Applicable
Not Applicable200
SEO
100
Strong1000
SEO
100
Strong1000
Security & Trust
78
Mostly ready1822View details
Security & Trust
78
Mostly ready1822View details
Performance
50
Needs work1310View details
Performance
50
Needs work1310View details

Prioritized recommendations

Issues ranked by score impact

3 items need attention

AI DiscoverabilityBot Access ControlEmerging recommendation

ai.txt policy

ai.txt policy failed at "Validate transport".

62 Fail

Needs attention

ai.txt policy

Failed check
01

Issue

ai.txt appears to be an HTML page or error document rather than a plain-text policy.

02

Why it matters

ai.txt is a fragmented emerging convention. It can communicate human-readable AI crawling, training, attribution, restriction, and contact guidance, but it is not a standard access-control mechanism and absence should not be penalized.

Check name

ai.txt policy

Score

38/100

Status

fail

Category

Bot Access Control

Maturity

Emerging recommendation

Goal

Publish an advisory human-readable AI usage policy only when the site intentionally needs one.

Result

ai.txt policy failed at "Validate transport".

Validation steps

  1. Validate transport

    ai.txt appears to be an HTML page or error document rather than a plain-text policy.

  2. Parse ai.txt policy

    Transport validation failed before policy parsing could be trusted.

  3. Validate policy content

    ai.txt does not follow the AI Visibility section model; treating it as non-standard advisory text.

Evidence log3 steps · 14 lines
Validate transport [fail]! ai.txt appears to be an HTML page or error document rather than a plain-text policy.INFOValidate transportINFOChecking ai.txt media type, size, line count, and whether the response looks like plain text contentType="text/html; charset=utf-8" length=67489 lineCount=888FAILCompare media type to preferred text/plain transport actual="text/html" expected="text/plain preferred; readable text required"FAILai.txt appears to be an HTML page or error document rather than a plain-text policy.Parse ai.txt policy [fail]! Transport validation failed before policy parsing could be trusted.INFOParse ai.txt policyINFODetecting ai.txt convention from bracket sections, frontmatter, headings, and ai.txt context linksINFODetected policy structure convention="unknown-text" sections=[] markdownHeadings=[]WARNCheck AI Visibility required sections actual="missing identity, permissions, restrictions" expected="identity, permissions, and restrictions" missingRecommended=["attribution","contact","content-types"]WARNTransport validation failed before policy parsing could be trusted.Validate policy content [warning]! ai.txt does not follow the AI Visibility section model; treating it as non-standard advisory text.INFOValidate policy contentINFOChecking required section content, permission/restriction language, attribution, contact details, and safety risks convention="unknown-text"INFODetected policy signals hasPermissionLanguage=false hasRestrictionLanguage=true hasTrainingLanguage=false hasAttributionLanguage=true hasContact=falseWARNCheck required and recommended section coverage actual={"missingRequired":["identity","permissions","restrictions"],"missingRecommended":["attribution","contact","content-types"]} expected={"missingRequired":[],"recommendedPresentWhenPossible":true}WARNai.txt does not follow the AI Visibility section model; treating it as non-standard advisory text.

Security & TrustSecurity & TrustEstablished

Content-Security-Policy

Content-Security-Policy failed at "Evaluate fetch baseline".

50 Fail

Needs attention

Content-Security-Policy

Failed check
01

Issue

CSP does not define default-src; several fetch directives may have no restrictive fallback.

02

Why it matters

Content Security Policy reduces the impact of injection bugs by limiting where scripts, styles, frames, forms, and other browser resources can load or execute.

Check name

Content-Security-Policy

Score

50/100

Status

fail

Category

Security & Trust

Maturity

Established

Goal

Constrain browser resource loading and script execution with an enforcing Content-Security-Policy header.

Result

Content-Security-Policy failed at "Evaluate fetch baseline".

Validation steps

  1. Evaluate fetch baseline

    CSP does not define default-src; several fetch directives may have no restrictive fallback.

  2. Evaluate script execution

    No script-src or default-src directive constrains script execution.

  3. Review hardening directives

    CSP is missing recommended hardening directives: object-src, base-uri, form-action.

  4. Review CSP reporting

    CSP does not define a reporting endpoint.

Evidence log4 steps · 16 lines
Evaluate fetch baseline [fail]! CSP does not define default-src; several fetch directives may have no restrictive fallback.INFOEvaluate fetch baselineINFOEvaluate resource loading fallback explicitFetchDirectives=[]FAILCompare fetch baseline actual="0 explicit fetch directives" expected="restricted default-src or broad explicit fetch coverage" issue="CSP does not define default-src; several fetch directives may have no restrictive fallback."FAILCSP does not define default-src; several fetch directives may have no restrictive fallback.Evaluate script execution [fail]! No script-src or default-src directive constrains script execution.INFOEvaluate script executionINFOInspect effective script directive FAILCompare script execution posture actual={"hasNonce":false,"hasHash":false,"hasStrictDynamic":false,"hasUnsafeInline":false,"hasUnsafeEval":false,"hasWildcardHost":false,"hasBroadScheme":false,"dangerousSchemes":[]} expected="constrained script sources without unsafe execution allowances" issue="No script-src or default-src directive constrains script execution."FAILNo script-src or default-src directive constrains script execution.Review hardening directives [warning]! CSP is missing recommended hardening directives: object-src, base-uri, form-action.INFOReview hardening directivesINFOInspect CSP hardening directives frameAncestors=["'self'","https://kofi.nima.tremau.net","https://testingkofi.nima.tremau.net"] formCount=1WARNCompare recommended hardening coverage actual=["object-src","base-uri","form-action"] expected="no missing object-src/base-uri/form-action requirements" issue="CSP is missing recommended hardening directives: object-src, base-uri, form-action."WARNCSP is missing recommended hardening directives: object-src, base-uri, form-action.Review CSP reporting [warning]! CSP does not define a reporting endpoint.INFOReview CSP reportingINFOInspect CSP reporting directives reportOnlyHeaderPresent=false reportOnlyDirectives=[]WARNCompare violation reporting configuration actual="no reporting endpoint" expected="report-to or report-uri present" issue="CSP does not define a reporting endpoint."WARNCSP does not define a reporting endpoint.

PerformancePerformanceBrowser audit

Font display

100 Fail

Check name

Font display

Score

0/100

Status

fail

Device

desktop

Category

Performance

Estimated savings

Est savings of 40 ms

Fix guidance

Consider setting [font-display](https://developer.chrome.com/docs/performance/insights/font-display) to swap or optional to ensure text is consistently visible. swap can be further optimized to mitigate layout shifts with [font metric overrides](https://developer.chrome.com/blog/font-fallbacks).

Evidence
{
  "displayValue": "Est savings of 40 ms",
  "description": "Consider setting [font-display](https://developer.chrome.com/docs/performance/insights/font-display) to swap or optional to ensure text is consistently visible. swap can be further optimized to mitigate layout shifts with [font metric overrides](https://developer.chrome.com/blog/font-fallbacks)."
}

Sign in to see 40 other issues and the full report

Create a free account to unlock every issue, evidence details, exports, and higher free limits.

Development Note:

Please configure GOOGLE_CLIENT_ID in .env to activate live login.

Fix with MCP or CLI

Use this report as the handoff into remediation. Generate a coding-agent prompt with the failing checks attached, or jump to the MCP and CLI setup docs before your next rescan.

Score history

Public scan score over time

Public reports for this website origin. Select any point or report link to open that canonical report.

1 reports
Public score history report links
Scan dateScoreReadinessReport
55/100Level 3, Bot-AwareCurrent report