You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Robots.txt already allows all major AI crawlers on the docs site — GPTBot, ClaudeBot, Claude-User, PerplexityBot, Google-Extended, Amazonbot, AI2Bot, xAI-Bot, cohere-ai, CCBot, and more are all explicitly Allow: / (verified via authoritative HTTP check of https://github.github.com/gh-aw/robots.txt, HTTP 200). The site-wide audit's "robots: 0" sub-score is a false negative caused by the GEO tool probing the domain root instead of the /gh-aw/ project-site path — no crawler-permission changes are needed.
Strong platform citation potential for Google AI: docs homepage scores 73/100 for Google AI Overviews, citing complete meta tags, Open Graph tags, SSR-safe content, and descriptive image alt text.
Solid Social Trust signals (4/5): 8 sameAs links, 3+ social profile references, all 4 Knowledge Graph pillars present, and reviews/testimonials detected.
Good Consistency Trust (4/5): brand name consistent across title/H1/schema, dateModified present, no mixed signals.
README has FAQ/Organization schema groundwork contributing to a 43/100 ChatGPT citation score, and Perplexity citation score of 45/100 thanks to content freshness signals, external links, and an RSS feed.
🚨 Critical Gaps
No /llms.txt on the docs site — the single most commonly cited AI-discovery signal is completely absent (llms score: 0/max on both docs and are only partially present on README).
No AI-discovery machine-readable endpoints: /.well-known/ai.txt, /ai/summary.json, /ai/faq.json, /ai/service.json are all missing site-wide (ai_discovery: 0/100 on both targets).
README has zero structured data (schema: 0/100) — no WebSite, Organization, or FAQPage JSON-LD, and no sameAs links for Knowledge Graph disambiguation, unlike the docs site.
6 blog pages score in the "Critical" band (33–35/100), driven by very low schema (3/100) and brand/entity scores (2–3/100) — these are the weakest-performing pages in the sitemap.
Hidden text (cloaking risk) detected on both the docs homepage and README (display:none/visibility:hidden content) — AI crawlers can read it and may penalize this pattern.
Keyword stuffing: "github" density is 2.7% (docs) and 3.6% (README), both flagged for vocabulary diversification.
🔧 Recommended Fixes
Ordered by estimated score impact:
Create /llms.txt for the docs site (geo llms --base-url https://github.github.com/gh-aw) — organizational AI-indexing signal, addresses the largest single missing category (llms: 0 → potential full points).
Add WebSite + Organization JSON-LD schema to the README/repo homepage, including sameAs links to relevant profiles (e.g. GitHub org, LinkedIn) — closes the schema: 0/100 gap on README.
Publish /.well-known/ai.txt, /ai/summary.json, /ai/faq.json, /ai/service.json on the docs site to unlock the ai_discovery category (currently 0/100 across the board).
Remove or conditionally render hidden text (display:none/visibility:hidden) on both docs homepage and README to eliminate the cloaking penalty (-3 negative_penalty on each).
Add FAQPage schema and canonical links to the README to support AI snippet extraction and de-duplication.
Improve schema and brand/entity signals on the 6 critical-band blog posts (/blog/11, /blog/9, /blog/8, /blog/7, /blog/4, plus one more) — these currently score 33–35/100, dragging down the sitemap average.
Diversify vocabulary to reduce "github" keyword density below stuffing thresholds on both docs and README.
Add numerical data/statistics to content — the audit estimates up to +40% AI visibility gain from concrete stats, and Academic Trust flags "few or no statistics" on the docs site.
📋 Full Breakdown by Category
Docs site (github.github.com/gh-aw/) — score_breakdown:
Category
Score
Robots.txt
0*
llms.txt
0
Schema JSON-LD
13
Meta Tags
14
Content
7
Signals
6
AI Discovery
0
Brand & Entity
7
Negative penalty
-3
*Robots.txt sub-score is a measurement artifact (domain-root probe misses the /gh-aw/ project-site path). The authoritative check confirms the site's actual robots.txt already allows all major AI bots.
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
GEO Audit Report — github/gh-aw
Audit Date: 2026-08-16
Run: 31958824969
📊 Scores
github.github.com/gh-aw/, homepage)github.com/github/gh-aw)✅ Top Strengths
Allow: /(verified via authoritative HTTP check ofhttps://github.github.com/gh-aw/robots.txt, HTTP 200). The site-wide audit's "robots: 0" sub-score is a false negative caused by the GEO tool probing the domain root instead of the/gh-aw/project-site path — no crawler-permission changes are needed.sameAslinks, 3+ social profile references, all 4 Knowledge Graph pillars present, and reviews/testimonials detected.dateModifiedpresent, no mixed signals.🚨 Critical Gaps
/llms.txton the docs site — the single most commonly cited AI-discovery signal is completely absent (llms score: 0/max on both docs and are only partially present on README)./.well-known/ai.txt,/ai/summary.json,/ai/faq.json,/ai/service.jsonare all missing site-wide (ai_discovery: 0/100 on both targets).sameAslinks for Knowledge Graph disambiguation, unlike the docs site.display:none/visibility:hiddencontent) — AI crawlers can read it and may penalize this pattern.🔧 Recommended Fixes
Ordered by estimated score impact:
/llms.txtfor the docs site (geo llms --base-url https://github.github.com/gh-aw) — organizational AI-indexing signal, addresses the largest single missing category (llms: 0 → potential full points).sameAslinks to relevant profiles (e.g. GitHub org, LinkedIn) — closes the schema: 0/100 gap on README./.well-known/ai.txt,/ai/summary.json,/ai/faq.json,/ai/service.jsonon the docs site to unlock theai_discoverycategory (currently 0/100 across the board).display:none/visibility:hidden) on both docs homepage and README to eliminate the cloaking penalty (-3 negative_penalty on each)./blog/11,/blog/9,/blog/8,/blog/7,/blog/4, plus one more) — these currently score 33–35/100, dragging down the sitemap average.📋 Full Breakdown by Category
Docs site (
github.github.com/gh-aw/) — score_breakdown:*Robots.txt sub-score is a measurement artifact (domain-root probe misses the
/gh-aw/project-site path). The authoritative check confirms the site's actualrobots.txtalready allows all major AI bots.README (
github.com/github/gh-aw) — score_breakdown:Docs Trust Stack (composite: 16, grade C, medium trust):
Platform citation scores (docs homepage):
*These robots.txt recommendations are already satisfied per the authoritative verification — no action needed.
📄 Sitemap Page Scores (20 pages audited)
Average: 37.75/100 (Foundation) — 14 pages Foundation band, 6 pages Critical band, 0 failed fetches.
Top scoring pages:
Worst scoring pages (Critical band):
All critical-band pages share the same pattern: schema 3/100, brand_entity 2-3/100, robots/llms/ai_discovery 0/100.
Automated audit powered by geo-optimizer-skill · Run logs
All reactions