Free guide:winning new clients predictably in 2026 · 10 pages, freeGet it now

AI Visibility Check: What 20 Checks Reveal About Your Website

ChatGPT, Perplexity and Google AI Overviews are becoming the first port of call for more and more people - but whether your website shows up there is decided at very concrete, testable points. Our free AI visibility check tests 20 of them. Here is what the four categories mean and why they decide your visibility.

Cover: AI Visibility Check: What 20 Checks Reveal About Your Website

More and more buying decisions no longer start with ten blue links but with an answer from ChatGPT, Perplexity or Google. Whether your website appears in those answers is not down to luck - it is decided at very concrete, testable points. That is exactly why we built the free AI visibility check: 20 checks across four categories, one score from 0 to 100. In this article you will read what the categories mean, which mistakes we see most often, and where the real levers for your AI visibility sit.

Score card of the AI visibility check: four categories, 100 points in total. AI access 30 points (robots.txt present 2, GPTBot allowed 7, ClaudeBot allowed 7, PerplexityBot allowed 7, Google-Extended allowed 7). Machine readability 25 points (llms.txt 10, XML sitemap 5, JSON-LD in the source 4, Organization schema 3, content schema 3). Citability 25 points (exactly one H1 5, at least two H2s 5, title up to 70 characters 5, meta description 50 to 170 characters 5, FAQ signals 5). Technical basics 20 points (HTTPS 5, no noindex 5, canonical tag 4, language attribute 3, Open Graph tags 3).
AI access 30 points, machine readability 25, citability 25, technical basics 20, adding up to 100. Individual weights: robots.txt 2 and each of the four crawlers 7; llms.txt 10, sitemap 5, JSON-LD 4, Organization schema 3, content schema 3; H1, H2s, title, meta description and FAQ signals 5 each; HTTPS 5, noindex 5, canonical 4, language attribute 3, Open Graph 3. Source: point distribution of the AI visibility check, as of July 2026. It fetches the submitted page plus the host's robots.txt, llms.txt and sitemap.xml and evaluates them deterministically, without a language model.

Why should you measure AI visibility at all?

Because traffic from AI assistants is small but unusually valuable. The Semrush study on AI search traffic puts the average visitor from an AI search at 4.4 times the value of a visitor from traditional organic search, measured by conversion rate. The reason: someone who lands on your site after an AI conversation has already compared their options and arrives with concrete intent.

At the same time, the Semrush analysis of billions of web visits shows how early we still are: AI traffic grew 66 per cent in 2025, faster than any other channel, yet still accounts for just 0.14 per cent of total visits. Precisely this combination - small volume, high growth, high quality - is the window in which positions can be claimed cheaply. As with zero-click search, the rule holds: wait until the channel is big, and you will be competing against everyone.

Two figures side by side: 0.14 per cent share of AI traffic in all website visits worldwide, measured across more than 50,000 websites, and a 4.4 times higher conversion rate for visitors from AI search compared with traditional organic search. Below: plus 66 per cent AI traffic in 2025, from 462 to 767 million visits per month.
Share of AI traffic in all website visits 0.14%, growth in 2025 plus 66% (from 462 to 767 million visits per month), conversion rate of AI visitors 4.4 times that of traditional organic search. Sources: Semrush traffic channel mix study, worldwide channel data from more than 50,000 websites across 17 industries, January to December 2025; Semrush AI search traffic study, based on more than 500 marketing and SEO topics. Semrush states neither a sample size nor a field period for the 4.4x figure, so it rests on weaker evidence than the other two.

Do the AI crawlers even reach your website?

The first and most heavily weighted category in the check is AI access: does a robots.txt exist, and are the four most important AI crawlers - GPTBot (OpenAI), ClaudeBot (Anthropic), PerplexityBot and Google-Extended - allowed to read your content? This sounds trivial, but it is not: according to Cloudflare, only around 37 per cent of the top 10,000 domains have a robots.txt at all, and GPTBot is explicitly disallowed in just 7.8 per cent of those files.

In other words: most websites have never consciously decided what AI systems are allowed to do with them. Either choice can be right - if you want to protect your content, you may block the crawlers. But then AI invisibility is a decision, not a surprise. The check makes the current state visible so you can decide deliberately rather than by accident.

Can machines actually read your content?

AI assistants increasingly answer questions via retrieval-augmented generation: they fetch live web pages, parse them and quote from them. The second category therefore tests how easy your website is to process by machine: is there an llms.txt serving as a table of contents for AI systems? A clean XML sitemap? And structured data via schema markup - once for the organisation (who are you?) and once for the content type (article, FAQ, service, product)?

Structured data is the part most often missing entirely in the checks we see. Yet it is the cheapest fix: an Organization schema and a matching content type can be built in an afternoon and help every machine - Google search just as much as the AI assistant.

Would an AI actually cite you?

Being crawled is a long way from being cited. Cloudflare measured in June 2025 how often AI providers crawl compared with the traffic they send back: Google sat at roughly 14 crawls per referral, OpenAI at 1,700, Anthropic at 73,000. Being cited is the exception - which is exactly why the third category tests whether your pages make it easy for an AI.

Bar chart on a logarithmic scale: crawls per referral in June 2025. Google (search and AI) 14, OpenAI (ChatGPT) 1,700, Anthropic (Claude) 73,000. The axis runs from 1 to 100,000, every step is ten times the one before.
Crawls per referral in June 2025: Google around 14, OpenAI 1,700, Anthropic 73,000. Bar scale logarithmic from 1 to 100,000. Source: Cloudflare, Content Independence Day, published 1 July 2025, measured across the Cloudflare network. Google's crawler serves classic search and AI answers at the same time, so its figure is not directly comparable with the AI-only crawlers.

Concretely: exactly one H1 per page, a clear subheading structure - ideally phrased as questions, because that is how people ask AI systems -, a title under 70 characters, a meta description between 50 and 170 characters, and FAQ signals. None of this is secret AI knowledge; it is clean craft. A self-contained passage that answers a concrete question with a sourced figure is citable for humans and machines alike.

And what about the technical basics?

The fourth category tests the foundations where visibility quietly fails: HTTPS, a canonical tag, a set language attribute and Open Graph tags. Plus the most common own goal of all: a forgotten noindex that survives a relaunch on the live site and removes the page from every search system. Five minutes of checking here saves months of invisible damage.

Comparison of what the check tests and what it does not. AI access: it tests whether GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot and Google-Extended are blocked in robots.txt, it does not test whether those crawlers actually fetch the page. Machine readability: it tests whether llms.txt, sitemap and schema markup exist and are machine-readable, it does not test whether the content behind them has any substance. Citability: it tests H1, subheadings, title length, meta description and FAQ signals, it does not test whether ChatGPT or Perplexity name the page today. Scope: it covers the submitted page plus robots.txt, llms.txt and sitemap.xml, it does not cover every other page, load time and competition.
The check tests: blocks for GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot and Google-Extended in robots.txt; whether llms.txt, sitemap and schema markup exist and are machine-readable; H1, subheadings, title length, meta description, FAQ signals - all for the submitted page plus robots.txt, llms.txt and sitemap.xml. It does not test: whether the crawlers actually turn up, whether the content has substance, whether ChatGPT or Perplexity name you today, every other page, load time and competition. Source: how the AI visibility check is built, as of July 2026, without a language model and without querying any AI assistant. Which limits follow from that is our editorial assessment, not a measurement.

Three levers for your AI visibility

Measure first, build second. Run the check and work through the categories in order: access before machine readability before citability. A perfectly structured page achieves nothing if the crawler is locked out.

Build citable passages. Questions as headings, one sourced figure per section, references linked. And because AI visitors convert 4.4 times better according to Semrush: make sure solid conversion rate optimisation turns those few, high-quality visits into enquiries.

Set up the machine essentials once, properly. llms.txt, sitemap, Organization schema plus a matching content type - a one-off project of a few hours, not a treadmill. From then on it works for every single page.

The check is free, needs nothing but your URL and runs in seconds: to the AI visibility check. And if you would like to talk through your results, just drop us a line. 💌