SourceContact
Free · No sign-up · Run from an overseas check point

llms.txt CheckDoes your site serve an llms.txt — and does it actually do anything?

We check whether your site serves an llms.txt, and tell you something most tools will not: this is always advisory, never scored, and we do not recommend adding one for search visibility — Google has stated that Search does not use the file.

This checks whether the file is there. It does not measure how often your brand is mentioned in AI answers — that is what continuous monitoring does. See continuous monitoring →

Choose your business type so the report uses the right buyer perspective

No account, no email, no phone number. Each result gets a permanent link you can share.

Why we do not score llms.txt, and do not suggest you add one

llms.txt is a community convention: put a Markdown file at your site root telling AI retrievers which pages matter. The idea is easy enough to follow, and plenty of vendors sell llms.txt configuration as a service.

But Google has stated that Search does not use the file, and large third-party studies show no positive contribution to citation prediction. Today it is useful mainly for documentation sites aimed at coding agents.

So we always treat it as advisory and never let it into the denominator: having one earns nothing, and lacking one is not a defect. The report you get from the check says exactly what this page says — we do not recommend adding one for search visibility.

This is the same standard we apply to Cloudflare's Content-Signal directive: if there is no public evidence that something affects the outcome, we do not score sites against it. Making an exception for one item is where the method stops meaning anything.

Our own site serves an llms.txt, and that file itself says its effect is not well established. We provide it to lower the cost of verifying us, not as a ranking tactic.

What actually decides whether you get fetched

Your robots.txt rules for retrieval bots. Blocking any of OAI-SearchBot, Claude-SearchBot, PerplexityBot, Bingbot or Googlebot removes you from the corresponding AI's answers — that is documented by the vendors and the consequence is unambiguous.

And whether your main content can be read without executing JavaScript. A page whose body only appears after the front-end framework runs is a blank page to any fetcher that takes the HTML and stops.

If you are going to change one thing, change those two. llms.txt comes a long way after them.

Questions

Should I add an llms.txt at all?

If the goal is search or AI visibility, we do not recommend adding one for that purpose — Google has stated Search does not use the file, and large third-party studies find no positive contribution. It is useful mainly for documentation sites aimed at coding agents. To improve your odds of being fetched and cited, first confirm your robots.txt lets retrieval bots in and that your content does not require JavaScript to be read.

What exactly does this check look at?

Only whether your site root serves an llms.txt and whether it can be fetched. It does not validate the file's format or content quality — which pages you list is an editorial judgement with no public standard to measure it against, so we will not score it for you.

Why do other tools score llms.txt when you do not?

Because we hold every check to the same rule: anything with no public evidence that it affects the outcome is reported as advisory and kept out of the denominator. Making an exception for one item is where the method stops meaning anything.

Do I get an overall score?

No. Each finding comes with its evidence and its limits, and none of it is compressed into a single number.

The judging logic is fully open source. The engine behind this page is published under the GNU AGPL-3.0. How every conclusion is reached, and where its limits lie, is written in the code and its comments and can be checked line by line: github.com/Saqierma/miaowageo