AI Access Audit (robots.txt + llms.txt)
Pricing
$250.00 / 1,000 completed audits
AI Access Audit (robots.txt + llms.txt)
How does a site present itself to AI? Per-crawler robots.txt verdicts for 13 major AI user agents (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, Google-Extended, CCBot and more), llms.txt presence and shape, sitemap signals, and a concrete fix list. Charged only when the audit completes.
Pricing
$250.00 / 1,000 completed audits
Rating
0.0
(0)
Developer
Chris Arsenault
Maintained by CommunityActor stats
0
Bookmarked
2
Total users
1
Monthly active users
3 days ago
Last modified
Categories
Share
How does a site present itself to AI? In one call: a per-crawler verdict for the 13 AI user agents that matter, llms.txt presence and shape, sitemap discoverability, and a concrete fix list. This is the audit behind every "are we visible to AI?" conversation happening in marketing and SEO teams right now.
What it checks
- robots.txt policy, per AI crawler: GPTBot, OAI-SearchBot, ChatGPT-User, ClaudeBot, Claude-Web, anthropic-ai, PerplexityBot, Perplexity-User, Google-Extended, Applebot-Extended, CCBot, Bytespider, meta-externalagent. Each gets a verdict —
blocked,partial,allowed, orunaddressed— plus the exact rule that decides it. Training crawlers and on-behalf-of-user agents are labeled by purpose, because blocking one and not the other is usually a deliberate choice. - llms.txt: present or not, and whether it has the shape consumers expect (sections, markdown links) or is just a stub.
- Sitemap: declared in robots.txt, and reachable.
- Recommendations: a short, specific fix list — never generic advice.
Output
A summary row plus one row per crawler:
{ "agent": "GPTBot", "purpose": "OpenAI training", "verdict": "unaddressed","basis": "no applicable rules (crawlers default to allowed)" }
Why "unaddressed" matters
Most sites have never stated an AI policy at all — which means every AI crawler assumes full access. Whether that is fine or a problem is a business decision; this audit makes the current state explicit so someone can actually decide.
Use cases
- Agencies: the AI-visibility line item for every site audit, generated in seconds.
- Publishers deciding an AI stance: see the current posture before changing it, then re-run to verify the change took.
- Agents doing due diligence: check whether a data source permits AI access before building on it.
Billing is per completed audit; three or four polite GETs per run. Built by 1450 Enterprises, the team behind the WordPress Content Audit and MCP Server Probe.