This site runs on what it sells
crawlpod.com uses the ai-visibility npm package for its own robots.txt, llms.txt, structured data, and crawler detection — not a separate internal implementation. Below is exactly which features are used, and this site's own live score from the same scanner at /scan, run against itself.
What this site actually uses
RobotsGeneratorai-visibility/generators
Generates /robots.txt, explicitly allowing GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, Google-Extended, Bingbot, CCBot, and Applebot-Extended.
LLMSTextGeneratorai-visibility/generators
Generates /llms.txt and /llms-full.txt from this site's actual content collections at build time, not a hand-maintained file.
SchemaBuilderai-visibility/schema
Builds Organization, WebSite, Article, FAQPage, BreadcrumbList, and SoftwareApplication JSON-LD used across the site.
detectBotai-visibility/detector
Detects AI crawlers in this site's edge proxy (src/proxy.ts) to power the homepage's live crawler-log panel — the zero-dependency, edge-safe detector added in 0.3.0.
The scanner you're looking atthis site's own /lib/scanner
Built for /scan, and run against this very page below — the same engine, no special-casing.
This site uses the npm package. The same features — detector, generators, schema, scoring — are available in the Python package for Django, Flask, and FastAPI projects.
The score above hasn't always looked like this — see what it looked like the first time this site ran its own audit and what got fixed as a result.
This site, scanned live
https://crawlpod.com/
80
out of 100
AI assistants can read this site well and have what they need to cite it accurately.
How this score is calculated
Six weighted categories, each broken into named checks — published here, not hidden. A black-box score from a company selling the fix isn't trustworthy.
- Crawlability100/100 · 20% weight
- Structure78/100 · 20% weight
- Entity Signals91/100 · 20% weight
- Citation Readiness49/100 · 15% weight
- Content78/100 · 15% weight
- Authority71/100 · 10% weight
Issues found
Grouped by severity, then ordered by what each issue actually costs your overall score — weighted by how much its category counts, not by how completely one check failed.
Warning (7)
No substantive paragraph found after H1
The page doesn't open with a direct answer or description.
Why it matters
AI systems weight opening content most heavily when deciding whether to cite a page.
Statistics lack cited sources
1/8 statistic mentions reference a source.
Why it matters
Unsourced statistics are less likely to be trusted and cited by AI systems.
Some sections are too thin to stand alone
8/14 section(s) have insufficient content directly below their heading.
Why it matters
Thin sections can't be extracted as a self-contained answer.
No comparison content detected
No comparison table or "X vs Y"/"alternatives" section was found.
Why it matters
AI systems frequently field comparison queries; pages without comparison content are less likely to be cited for them.
Very few externally verifiable claims
The page makes quantitative claims without attributing them to a verifiable source.
Why it matters
AI systems are less likely to repeat or cite claims that read as unverifiable.
Author present but not marked up with Person schema
An author byline was found in the text/HTML, but no structured Person data.
Why it matters
AI systems can extract the author's name but can't verify credentials or link to a bio reliably.
Weak author attribution
An author byline exists but doesn't link to a bio/author page.
Why it matters
AI systems can't verify the author's expertise without a linked profile.
Suggestions (2)
No unique data or original research detected
Content built on your own research, surveys, or proprietary data is more likely to be cited than content that restates common knowledge.
Why it matters
Lower differentiation as a citation source versus competitors.
Below-target fact density
3.5 facts per 100 words (target: 4-6).
Why it matters
More specific data points would strengthen citability.
Crawlability
100/100 · 20% of overallStructure
78/100 · 20% of overallEntity Signals
91/100 · 20% of overallCitation Readiness
49/100 · 15% of overallContent
78/100 · 15% of overallAuthority
71/100 · 10% of overallLive crawler checks
Real, live-fetched evidence — not part of the AI Readiness Engine score above.
Live crawler check: bot vs. browser parity
GPTBot's live response has 100% of the text content a browser gets — no sign of bot-specific blocking or cloaking.
Scored with ai-visibility v0.8.2's AI Readiness Engine.
This looks like a Next.js site
Check out our npm package to integrate AI visibility into your framework. You can install it directly from npm and use our package to scan and optimize your site.
Frequently asked questions
Is this page's score computed differently than a normal /scan result?
No. This page calls the exact same scan engine used at /scan, against this site's own homepage. There's no separate or more lenient code path.
What if crawlpod.com doesn't score well?
Then that's a bug in this site, not something we'd hide — a company selling AI visibility tooling that fails its own scan has a credibility problem, not a marketing problem.
Does this page update automatically?
The result is refreshed on a rolling basis (at most an hour old), not computed fresh on every single page view.