Weak AI visibility with 6 of 22 criteria passing. Biggest gap: schema.org structured data.
Verdict
struct.ai has basic technical accessibility in place (HTTPS enabled, canonical URL configured, llms.txt present, and valid robots/sitemap endpoints), but overall AEO readiness is low at an overall score of 27. The biggest blocker is total absence of JSON-LD (schema_block_count: 0; schema_types_found: []), which limits machine understanding of entity, content type, and authorship. Content structure is also weak for AI extraction, with 13 H1 tags, zero question headings, no definition patterns, no tables or ordered lists, and no FAQ page (/faq returns 404). The site has strong quantitative content signals (225-228 data points) but lacks citation scaffolding, freshness metadata, and internal-link architecture needed for consistent AI citation outcomes.
Scoreboard
Top Opportunities
Improve Your Score
Guides for the criteria with the most room for improvement
Tidio runs 4 JSON-LD schema types. Crisp runs zero. That's not a coincidence -it's the difference between a 63 and a 34. Structured data is the machine-readable layer AI trusts most.
Our site runs 87 FAQ items across 9 categories with FAQPage schema on every one. That's not excessive -it's how we hit 88/100. Each Q&A pair is a citation opportunity AI can extract in seconds.
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.
Same content, three URLs, zero canonical tags. Congratulations -you just split your authority three ways and gave AI crawlers a headache.
Want us to improve your score?
We build citation-ready content that AI engines choose as the answer.