Moderate AI visibility with 12 of 22 criteria passing. Biggest gap: rss/atom feed.
Verdict
moss.dev has a solid technical foundation for AI discoverability, with `llms.txt` live (HTTP 200, 4,931 chars), AI-crawler-friendly `robots.txt` (HTTP 200), valid canonical setup, and strong schema implementation (4 JSON-LD blocks across Organization/FAQPage/WebSite). The main gap is not crawl access but extractable, citable depth: only 8 internal links, no RSS feed, no `ai.txt`, and no dedicated `/faq` page (404). Freshness and authority signals are also thin, with no `datePublished/dateModified`, no `<time>` elements, no Person schema, and only one quantitative data point. Overall, the site is indexable and structured, but under-optimized for citation frequency and answer-engine reuse.
Scoreboard
Top Opportunities
Improve Your Score
Guides for the criteria with the most room for improvement
Sitemaps tell crawlers what exists. RSS feeds tell them what changed. If you don't have one, your new content waits days -or weeks -to be discovered.
Your sitemap says 500 pages exist. Our crawl finds 700. Those 200 missing URLs? AI crawlers will never know they exist.
AI engines are citation machines -they need specific facts to quote. A page full of general advice with zero data points gives them nothing to work with.
AI has a trust hierarchy for sources. At the top: proprietary data and first-hand expert analysis. At the bottom: rewritten Wikipedia articles. We've watched AI preferentially cite sites with original benchmarks -even over bigger competitors.
Want us to improve your score?
We build citation-ready content that AI engines choose as the answer.