A 100-point scoring framework across five pillars. Score each criterion Green, Amber, or Red, total the points, and you have a defensible picture of how ready your site is for the AI-native web.
The principle
Score the substrate, not the surface. A future-proof site is built on a stable, structured, verifiable layer that humans, AI agents and crawlers all share. Immersive design and per-visitor personalisation are a surface that sits on top of that layer — valuable for people, but presentation, not future-proofing. The Index scores the substrate; the surface is deliberately out of scope, with one guard (P3) to keep it from hiding the canonical layer from machines.
The Needs a tool criteria — the measurement and monitoring you can't do by eye — are covered by the deeper scans: the automated audit's Premium report adds Core Web Vitals and domain authority, and the GEO/AEO scan crawls your site to grade answer architecture, AI-crawler access and how you're represented in AI answers. Same criteria — only the depth of automation changes.
Discoverability & Structure 25 points
Where most marketing managers are still blind: the AI-specific discovery and structure signals beyond classic SEO.
D1 Structured data & schema markup
Self-check8 pts
Organization, WebSite, Article, BreadcrumbList, FAQPage and Person schemas present and validated.
Green Multiple schema types, validated with no errors, rich-result eligible.
Amber Basic schema present but incomplete or with validation errors.
Red No structured data, or only CMS auto-output with no customisation.
D2 llms.txt & AI crawler directives
Self-check7 pts
llms.txt at root, AI-specific robots rules, noai/noimageai where appropriate.
Green Substantive llms.txt, llms-full.txt available, AI-specific robots directives.
Amber llms.txt present but minimal, no llms-full.txt.
Red No llms.txt, no AI-specific directives.
D3 Semantic HTML hygiene
Self-check5 pts
Correct heading hierarchy, landmark roles, clean predictable DOM that LLMs parse accurately.
Green Single H1, logical hierarchy, ARIA landmarks, no heading skips.
Amber Multiple H1s or heading skips, inconsistent landmarks.
Red No heading structure, div-soup, unparseable content order.
D4 Entity & knowledge-graph presence
Needs a tool5 pts
A recognised entity in the wider knowledge graph: consistent identifiers, sameAs links, and presence in authoritative sources (Wikidata, registries).
Green Defined entity with consistent sameAs across the web and presence in at least one authoritative graph (e.g. Wikidata); stable canonical entity node.
Amber Some sameAs links and consistent naming, but no authoritative-graph presence.
Red No entity strategy; inconsistent names/identifiers, invisible to the knowledge graph.
Citeability & Answer Architecture 15 points
The heart of generative engine optimisation: being not just found but quoted — accurately and with attribution. Optimised for share-of-model, not rank.
C1 Extractable answer units
Self-check6 pts
Self-contained 80–120 word answer units near the top of key pages that lift cleanly without surrounding context.
Green Extractable answer units on all key pages, no surrounding context needed, marked up as Q&A/FAQ where apt.
Amber Some pages have extractable content, inconsistent implementation.
Red Long-form only, no extractable answer units.
C2 Anchor-level addressability
Self-check4 pts
Stable fragment IDs and deep links so an engine can cite a specific claim, not just the page.
Green Persistent heading/section anchors site-wide, deep-linkable claims, stable URLs.
Amber Some anchors present but unstable or inconsistent.
Red No fragment addressability; only whole-page URLs.
datePublished/dateModified, visible last-reviewed/'as of' dates, changelogs, and canonical statements of fact engines can rely on.
Green All content structured-dated, visible last-reviewed dates, maintained changelog, canonical fact statements.
Amber Some content dated, inconsistent; few canonical statements.
Red No visible dates, no structured date metadata, no canonical claims.
Authority, Trust & Provenance 20 points
AI engines prioritise verifiable, credible sources. As the web fills with AI slop, provable origin becomes the moat.
A1 Verified author identity
Self-check8 pts
Machine-readable author schema with credentials, qualifications and verifiable experience.
Green Full Person schema with credentials, LinkedIn, memberships; all content attributed to a canonical profile.
Amber Author pages present but not machine-readable, inconsistent attribution.
Red No author attribution, anonymous content.
A2 E-E-A-T signals
Self-check6 pts
Case studies with outcomes, dated testimonials, current privacy policy, external citations.
Green Measurable case-study outcomes, recent testimonials, current policy, citations present.
Amber Some trust signals present but dated or incomplete.
Red No case studies or testimonials, outdated or missing privacy policy.
A3 Content provenance & authenticity
Needs a tool6 pts
Clear human authorship, disclosure of AI-assisted content, and — increasingly — cryptographic provenance (C2PA content credentials, signed content) proving origin.
Green Authorship clear and disclosed; cryptographic content credentials (C2PA) or signed provenance on key assets.
Amber Authorship clear and AI use disclosed, but no cryptographic provenance.
Red Undisclosed AI-generated content, no expert voice, no provenance.
Accessibility & Performance 15 points
The shared substrate humans and machines both depend on — now a legal floor, not a differentiator. The immersive, personalised human surface sits on top of this and is intentionally not scored.
P1 Core Web Vitals
Self-check6 pts
LCP, INP and CLS in green; fast TTFB; mobile-first rendering. Verifiable free via PageSpeed Insights / CrUX.
Green All three CWV green, TTFB under 200ms, mobile score 90+.
Amber One or two CWV amber, acceptable mobile performance.
Red One or more CWV red, significant performance issues.
P2 WCAG 2.2 AA & EAA compliance
Self-check6 pts
Contrast, alt text, keyboard nav, screen-reader support. Since the European Accessibility Act (in force 28 June 2025) this is a legal obligation for many commercial sites, not best practice.
Green Full AA conformance verified, no critical failures, EAA obligations met.
Amber Mostly compliant, some non-critical failures.
Red Multiple critical failures; legal exposure under the EAA.
P3 Ground-truth-layer stability
Self-check3 pts
A canonical, server-rendered content layer identical for every human, agent and crawler — personalisation and immersive UI sit on top without hiding or altering it.
Green Core content server-rendered and identical for all; personalisation is additive only; nothing critical locked in JS-only/WebGL.
Amber Some content client-rendered or personalised in ways agents may miss.
Red Content exists only per-personalised or inside canvas/WebGL; no stable canonical surface.
Agent Surface & Observability 25 points
The frontier and the fastest-rising weight: sites agents can use, that defend themselves in the agentic web, and that watch how they are represented.
A documented, callable surface — public API and/or MCP endpoint — so an agent can invoke functionality, not just read about it. Designed for Agent Experience: typed inputs, deterministic, idempotent, capabilities declared.
Green Documented API + MCP-compatible endpoint, published examples, idempotent actions an agent can invoke.
Amber API planned or partial, no MCP compatibility, human-oriented only.
Red No callable surface; tools are human-only.
AS2 Agentic defensibility
Needs a tool7 pts
Rate limiting, scraper detection, noai directives, prompt-injection hygiene, and GDPR / EU AI Act-compliant handling of any data flowing through AI features.
Green Rate limiting, active scraper detection, injection-hardened content, documented GDPR/AI-Act compliance for AI features.
Amber Basic rate limiting only, no formal data-protection assessment of AI features.
Red No rate limiting, no scraper controls, no governance of AI data flows.
AS3 AI-representation observability
Needs a tool8 pts
Monitoring how AI assistants actually describe you — accuracy, citations, hallucinations — plus AI-referral analytics. You can't manage what you don't measure.
Green Routine prompt-testing across major assistants, AI-referral tracking, and a process to correct misrepresentation.
Amber Occasional ad-hoc checks, no systematic monitoring.
Red No visibility into how AI represents the brand.
Track the standards as they change
The criteria evolve as AI web standards do. The monthly Radar keeps your assessment current.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We handle your email per our Privacy Policy.