Export Report
OVERALL SCORE
Level 2, Agent-Limited
- AI Discoverability 17 out of 100
- Agent Ease of Use 66 out of 100
- Security & Trust 74 out of 100
- GEO, AIO and AEO 55 out of 100
- SEO 85 out of 100
- Performance 75 out of 100
- Accessibility 0 out of 100
What AI sees of your website
Lakai
Lakai
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.
| Metric | Score | Status | Passed | Failed | Warning | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI Discoverability | 17 | Priority fix | 5 | 5 | 1 | View details |
| Discoverability | 7 | Priority fix | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| Content Readiness | 6 | Priority fix | 4 | 0 | 0 | |
| Bot Access Control | 34 | Priority fix | 0 | 5 | 1 | View details |
| Agent Ease of Use | 66 | Needs work | 18 | 0 | 0 | |
| Auth | 77 | Mostly ready | 10 | 0 | 0 | |
| Agent Commerce | 93 | Strong | 6 | 0 | 0 | |
| Google Agentic Browsing | 70 | Needs work | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
| GEO, AIO and AEO | 55 | Needs work | 8 | 0 | 0 | |
| GEO Readiness | Not Applicable | Not Applicable | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
| AIO Readiness | Not Applicable | Not Applicable | 4 | 0 | 0 | |
| AEO Readiness | Not Applicable | Not Applicable | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
| SEO | 85 | Mostly ready | 8 | 0 | 0 | |
| SEO | 85 | Mostly ready | 8 | 0 | 0 | |
| Security & Trust | 74 | Needs work | 18 | 0 | 0 | |
| Security & Trust | 74 | Needs work | 18 | 0 | 0 | |
| Performance | 75 | Mostly ready | 15 | 1 | 0 | View details |
| Performance | 75 | Mostly ready | 15 | 1 | 0 | View details |
Prioritized recommendations
Issues ranked by score impact
3 items need attention
AI DiscoverabilityBot Access ControlEstablished
AI bot rules in robots.txt
AI bot rules in robots.txt failed at "Fetch robots.txt".
50 Fail
AI DiscoverabilityBot Access ControlEstablished
AI bot rules in robots.txt
AI bot rules in robots.txt failed at "Fetch robots.txt".
Needs attention
AI bot rules in robots.txt
Issue
No robots.txt content was available to inspect for AI bot rules.
Details
Why it matters
AI crawler product tokens have different meanings. Explicit robots.txt groups make training, search, and retrieval access policy auditable for compliant crawler operators.
Check name
AI bot rules in robots.txt
Score
0/100
Status
fail
Category
Bot Access Control
Maturity
Established
Goal
Declare deliberate robots.txt rules for major AI training, AI search, user-triggered, and dataset crawlers.
Result
AI bot rules in robots.txt failed at "Fetch robots.txt".
Validation steps
Fetch robots.txt
No robots.txt content was available to inspect for AI bot rules.
robots.txt is missing for AI crawler policy inspection
Classify AI crawler rules
No explicit User-agent rules were found for major AI crawler tokens.
robots.txt lacks explicit AI crawler rules
Evidence log2 steps · 10 lines
Fetch robots.txt [fail]! No robots.txt content was available to inspect for AI bot rules.INFOFetch robots.txtINFORequesting /robots.txt from the site originFAILCheck whether robots.txt content is available actual="no content" expected="content returned" length=0FAILNo robots.txt content was available to inspect for AI bot rules.Classify AI crawler rules [fail]! No explicit User-agent rules were found for major AI crawler tokens.INFOClassify AI crawler rulesINFOParsing User-agent groups and Allow/Disallow records for known AI crawler tokens evaluatedPath="/"INFOEvaluating exact User-agent matches before wildcard fallback exactAiPolicyCount=0 totalCrawlerTokens=18FAILNo explicit AI crawler User-agent groups were found examplesExpected=["GPTBot","OAI-SearchBot","ClaudeBot","Google-Extended","CCBot"]FAILCompare explicit AI crawler coverage actual=0 expected="> 0 explicit non-search AI crawler policies" missingTokens=["GPTBot","OAI-SearchBot","ChatGPT-User","ClaudeBot","Claude-SearchBot","Claude-User","Google-Extended","Applebot-Extended","Amazonbot","Amzn-SearchBot","Amzn-User","PerplexityBot"]INFOResolved effective root-path policy for crawler tokens blocked=0 allowed=0 unspecified=21
AI DiscoverabilityBot Access ControlEmerging recommendation
ai.txt policy
ai.txt policy failed at "Fetch /ai.txt".
41 Fail
AI DiscoverabilityBot Access ControlEmerging recommendation
ai.txt policy
ai.txt policy failed at "Fetch /ai.txt".
Needs attention
ai.txt policy
Issue
/ai.txt returned HTTP 503.
Details
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
18/100
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 "Fetch /ai.txt".
Validation steps
Fetch /ai.txt
/ai.txt returned HTTP 503.
/ai.txt could not be fetched when present
Validate transport
ai.txt appears to be an HTML page or error document rather than a plain-text policy.
/ai.txt transport is invalid or not plain text
Parse ai.txt policy
Transport validation failed before policy parsing could be trusted.
/ai.txt policy format is missing required sections or non-standard
Validate policy content
ai.txt does not follow the AI Visibility section model; treating it as non-standard advisory text.
/ai.txt content is incomplete or unsafe
Evidence log4 steps · 18 lines
Fetch /ai.txt [fail]! /ai.txt returned HTTP 503.INFOFetch /ai.txtINFORequesting optional advisory policy file at /ai.txtFAILCompare /ai.txt HTTP response actual=503 expected="2xx when ai.txt is intentionally published; 404/410 means absent optional file" contentType="text/html" length=11010FAIL/ai.txt returned HTTP 503. statusCode=503Validate 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" length=11010 lineCount=284FAILCompare 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="generic-markdown" 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="generic-markdown"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.
PerformancePerformanceBrowser audit
Avoid large layout shifts
100 Fail
PerformancePerformanceBrowser audit
Avoid large layout shifts
Check name
Avoid large layout shifts
Score
0/100
Status
fail
Device
desktop
Category
Performance
Estimated savings
2 layout shifts found
Fix guidance
These are the largest layout shifts observed on the page. Each table item represents a single layout shift, and shows the element that shifted the most. Below each item are possible root causes that led to the layout shift. Some of these layout shifts may not be included in the CLS metric value due to [windowing](https://web.dev/articles/cls#what_is_cls). [Learn how to improve CLS](https://web.dev/articles/optimize-cls)
References
web.dev/learn/performanceEvidence
{
"displayValue": "2 layout shifts found",
"description": "These are the largest layout shifts observed on the page. Each table item represents a single layout shift, and shows the element that shifted the most. Below each item are possible root causes that led to the layout shift. Some of these layout shifts may not be included in the CLS metric value due to [windowing](https://web.dev/articles/cls#what_is_cls). [Learn how to improve CLS](https://web.dev/articles/optimize-cls)"
}Sign in to see 41 other issues and the full report
Create a free account to unlock every issue, evidence details, exports, and higher free limits.
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