llms.txt check

llms.txt: inspect a voluntary page reference

TL;DR

Review an optional Markdown reference file and the HTTP status of supported entries. File presence does not establish adoption by an AI system.

What the current check observes

GET /llms.txt distinguishes 200, 404/410 and retrieval unknown. A bounded leading HTML-document pattern is reported. A conservative standalone/list inline Markdown subset supplies up to eight distinct URL status checks. Exact URL duplicates and count/heading patterns are observations.

Context and prerequisites

This is not general Markdown validation, complete link checking or a consumer-compatibility test. Unsupported syntax can suppress actionable entries. A redirect, protected endpoint or intentionally retired URL needs context. Absence is optional, not a universal defect.

How to review the observation

If you maintain this file for a known consumer, inspect its actual response and intended source pages. Review 404/410 on the exact checked URL before changing an entry. Do not create a file just to earn a legacy score.

Illustrative example, not a universal prescription

Interpret in the actual page context
- [Reference](https://example.com/reference): API reference

This standalone entry is within the supported subset. A 200 status verifies only the bounded status response, not correct documentation content or AI use.

Measurement and experimental legacy calculation

Public measurement separates Confirmed issue, Advisory, Unknown, Not applicable and Observed pass. An observed pass applies only to an explicit bounded rule; absence of an emitted failure is not a pass. Missing prerequisites do not earn repair credit.

Start 100. Retrieval unknown returns 0; absent/empty returns 100; leading HTML pattern returns 10. Subtract min(40, 10 × sampled 404/410 count) and min(15, 5 × redirect count). Other observations do not deduct.

Legacy values are clamped to 0..100 and rounded. They are not readiness certification, risk indicators or predicted citation outcomes. Method changes do not rewrite historical records.

Full methodology and fixed weights

Sources and further manual validation

The observations above describe the local implementation, not guarantees from these sources. Protocol and provider documents help interpret purpose and perform checks this audit does not implement.

What observations does this check return?

LLMScore audits eleven readiness categories. Free, no signup.

Run this check on your site →
LLMScore - AI search readiness audits

© 2026 LLMScore