Every AI answer begins with a real customer question.
A person asks for a recommendation, comparison, local service, or solution. The language of that question and its location context influence what the system looks for next.
A live technical check of your site's AI-readiness fundamentals, using the same in-house crawler behind our full product.
A person asks for a recommendation, comparison, local service, or solution. The language of that question and its location context influence what the system looks for next.
The system identifies potentially useful pages, business entities, documents, and source material that may answer the question.
Relevance alone is not enough. Clarity, authority, supporting evidence, entity consistency, and local relevance influence which sources become stronger candidates.
Retrieved material is combined into a response. Clear facts and well-supported claims are easier to carry into an answer than vague or conflicting information.
A final response may name or link to sources that support its claims. This is the visible evidence a customer can review, not a score estimated behind the scenes.
Every check in this tool reviews a technical or content signal that can affect how crawlers and search systems discover, parse, and understand a website. The checks are practical foundations for AI-search readiness, but they do not guarantee that any platform will cite a business.
Schema markup can express facts about a business, its services, and visible question-and-answer content in a machine-readable format. Organization and business-related markup can help systems interpret site entities more consistently. The appropriate schema types depend on what a business genuinely offers and what is visible on the page, which is why a relevant audit should not treat every missing schema type as a failure.
A clear page title, a useful meta description, one primary H1, logical headings, canonical signals, and readable visible content all help crawlers and search systems understand a page. These are long-standing web fundamentals that remain relevant when people use AI-assisted search experiences.
For a business that has real equivalent pages in more than one language, hreflang helps search systems understand the relationship between those versions. This can be especially relevant to businesses serving English- and Arabic-speaking audiences across the UAE and wider Middle East.
Robots.txt directives can affect whether individual crawlers may request website content. A site may allow one crawler while restricting another, sometimes intentionally and sometimes because of broad rules. This tool reviews the availability of robots.txt and checks the relevant access signals it can observe.
A sitemap.xml file can help search crawlers discover pages efficiently. An llms.txt file is an emerging publisher convention that some teams use to provide a concise, machine-oriented guide to key site content. Its presence can be useful to review, but it should not be presented as a guarantee of AI visibility or citations.
This free tool checks technical and on-page readiness signals. It does not prove whether ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, or Google AI features cite or recommend a business today. Measuring real AI visibility requires monitoring relevant customer questions, reviewing actual answers, and retaining the evidence over time.
Run another technical readiness check after meaningful site changes: a redesign, platform migration, major content update, a robots.txt change, the launch of an Arabic-language version, or a structured-data deployment. Checking after a genuine change is usually more useful than running repeated scans with no corresponding website update.
No - this free check measures whether your site is technically ready to be cited, not whether it's actually being cited today. That distinction is exactly what the full product measures with real, stored evidence.
Not every check applies to every business - a service business with no products has no real reason to be marked down for missing Product schema. These questions let the tool check only what's genuinely relevant to you.
The tool will genuinely check for them, and if they're missing, that shows as a real Fail - the toggles only skip checks you tell it don't apply, they never fabricate a pass.
Genuinely a few seconds to around 15 seconds, depending on how quickly your site and its robots.txt respond - this is real network activity, several actual fetches, not a simulated delay.
Each scan does real, live work - fetching your page, your robots.txt, and checking for llms.txt and sitemap.xml - and this limit keeps that genuine crawling activity reasonable for a free, public tool.
The technical checks themselves (schema, headings, meta tags) work identically regardless of language - the hreflang check specifically verifies that a genuine second-language version is properly connected, when you tell us one exists.
Not necessarily - a low score usually means specific, fixable technical gaps, not that your actual business or its real content is weak. Many of these gaps take real but modest work to close.
Not necessarily - this checks each AI crawler individually. A site can correctly allow Googlebot for traditional search while accidentally blocking GPTBot or PerplexityBot specifically, which is a genuinely common, easy-to-miss mistake.
Yes - submit any real, specific URL on your site, not just the homepage. Different pages on the same site can have genuinely different schema and on-page results.
Yes - the domain checked, along with a best-effort location, is recorded for our own internal visibility into how the tool is used. Your specific page content or scan results aren't shared anywhere.
Because it's genuinely emerging as a real convention right now, and being ready early is a real, low-cost advantage - the file is simple to create, and this site's own llms.txt generator tool can help.
No - this checks for genuine, substantive content, not just a word count target. Adding padding or filler would work against you elsewhere (content quality genuinely matters for AI citation), so the real fix is adding real, useful content, not stretching existing text.
Yes - every technical check here applies to any website, anywhere. The business-type toggles and the underlying checks aren't region-specific.
Many of these - title tags, meta descriptions, basic schema, alt text - are genuinely within reach for a competent developer following the specific finding. Others, like genuine content depth or a coordinated AEO strategy, benefit from more experienced, dedicated work.
It should generally stay the same, since these are real, fetched technical facts about your live page - a different result on an unchanged page would suggest something about your site itself is inconsistent between requests, which is itself worth investigating.
Average across 5 published client reviews.
Permissioned testimonials“Really good experience with the team. They worked on our website structure, technical issues and AI visibility. After the optimization, we started noticing our clinic appearing in more AI-generated answers and citations. The communication was also very good.
“They helped us fix several technical issues and added the right schema markup to our website. I was particularly impressed with their understanding of AEO and GEO and how AI crawlers understand website content. Everything was explained clearly and professionally.
“We needed help improving our online visibility beyond traditional Google rankings. The team optimized our website for AI search and worked on our content and structured data. The process was straightforward and we are happy with the results so far.
“Very professional service. They reviewed our website in detail and found several areas that were limiting our visibility. The AEO and GEO optimization was handled properly, and they also gave us a clear direction for improving our content for AI search.
“Good work and very knowledgeable team. They helped optimize our website for AI platforms and improved the way our services and expertise are presented to search engines and AI systems. I liked that they focused on both the technical side and the content.
The full product measures whether AI platforms actually cite you, using real stored evidence rather than a score alone.