The score is a legibility measure, not a popularity measure. It rates how easily an answer engine can reach your pages, parse them, and extract facts it can quote. It does not measure how often answer engines currently mention you. A high score means nothing on your site is blocking a citation; earning the citation is the off-site work at the end of this report.
The five categories answer different questions:
| Category | The question it answers |
|---|---|
| Positioning clarity | Can a model tell what you sell, and to whom, without inferring it? |
| ICP and conversion clarity | Is it obvious who this is for and what the next step costs? |
| Technical crawlability | Can a crawler reach your pages and get real content back? |
| Structured data and answer assets | Is what your pages claim confirmed in machine-readable form? |
| AI answer readiness | Do you have the page types engines prefer to quote — FAQ, comparison, trust language? |
Positioning clarity and technical crawlability carry the most weight, because a model that cannot read your pages or cannot tell what you sell has nothing to work with regardless of how the other three score.
Status labels are fixed thresholds: strong is 75 and above, adequate is 50 to 74, weak is below 50. They describe the category score, not your ranking against anyone else.
The evidence checklist is deliberately binary. Each signal is Pass or Needs work with no partial credit, because these are things a crawler either finds or does not. A missing sitemap is not 60% of a sitemap.
Read the categories before the number. Two sites scoring 45 can need completely different work — one blocked at the crawler, one legible but with nothing quotable on the page. The overall score tells you roughly where you stand; the weakest category tells you what to do on Monday.
Top finding: The weakest area is structured data and answer assets at 0/100, the signal AI systems are least able to read on this site.
Biggest gap: Structured data and answer assets is the weakest category; this site is missing sitemap.xml, llms.txt, structured data, entity (sameAs) links, FAQ content, and comparison content that answer engines rely on.
First fix: Start with: publish sitemap.xml and reference from robots.txt (impact high, difficulty low).
| Category | Score | Status | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Positioning clarity | 100/100 | strong | Specific page title; Useful meta description; H1 names the category/problem |
| ICP and conversion clarity | 55/100 | adequate | Pricing/plans path detected; Lead capture path detected; Docs/product depth detected |
| Technical crawlability | 20/100 | weak | Enough crawlable text |
| Structured data and answer assets | 0/100 | weak | |
| AI answer readiness | 28/100 | weak |
| Signal | Status | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| robots.txt | Needs work | No reachable robots.txt was found. |
| sitemap.xml | Needs work | No sitemap.xml was detected at the site root. |
| llms.txt | Needs work | No /llms.txt was found; AI engines have no curated profile. |
| JSON-LD structured data | Needs work | No JSON-LD/schema markup was detected. |
| Entity links (sameAs) | Needs work | No sameAs entity links were detected; AI engines cannot connect the site to its official profiles (LinkedIn, GitHub, Crunchbase). |
| FAQ content | Needs work | No FAQ content was detected. |
| Pricing or demo path | Pass | A pricing/plans path was detected. |
| Lead capture | Pass | A lead-capture form or email field was detected. |
| Comparison/alternatives content | Needs work | No comparison/alternatives content was detected. |
| Docs & security depth | Pass | Docs and/or security/compliance language was detected. |
Sequenced by execution dependency — foundational crawlability first, then structured data, then content assets. Only signals weak or missing on this site are listed.
| Recommendation | Impact | Difficulty | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Add llms.txt Add /llms.txt with a concise AI-readable company profile, key URLs, target ICP, and preferred category language. |
High | Low | A published /llms.txt gives AI crawlers a curated profile to read instead of inferring positioning from raw HTML. |
| Add FAQ content Add FAQ content answering category, pricing, security, integration, and “who is this for?” questions. |
High | Low | FAQ content supplies the direct question-and-answer text that answer engines prefer to quote. |
| Publish sitemap.xml and reference from robots.txt Publish a sitemap.xml and reference it from robots.txt. |
High | Low | A sitemap referenced from robots.txt is foundational crawlability — pages that are not discoverable cannot be read at all. |
| Add Organization / SoftwareApplication JSON-LD Add schema.org JSON-LD for Organization, WebSite, SoftwareApplication/Product, and FAQPage where relevant. |
High | Medium | Structured data lets answer engines classify the product and company from explicit fields rather than guessing from prose. |
| Create comparison / alternative page Create comparison/alternatives pages so AI systems can place the product in the right buying context. |
High | Medium | Comparison content gives AI systems the buying context needed to place the product against alternatives. |
| Declare official profiles with sameAs Declare your official profiles (LinkedIn, GitHub, Crunchbase) with Organization sameAs JSON-LD so AI engines can verify the company entity across the web. |
Medium | Medium | sameAs entity links let AI systems verify the company across independent profiles instead of treating it as an unverified entity. |
On-site fixes make your site legible to AI engines, but engines recommend companies they can find in search indexes and verify across independent sources. Complete the path:
sameAs JSON-LD block, consistency rules, and how to validate it.The analysis above is real and unedited — that is genuinely how this site scored. The roadmap is trimmed. The full $29 report adds:
llms.txt draft, plus the PDF and Markdown versions# BaseMouse > Context infrastructure for AI agents: import your docs, pull cited context packs over one endpoint, and maintain an append-only history of everything your agents were told. ## Primary URL https://basemouse.com ## About BaseMouse is context infrastructure designed for AI agents. It allows development teams to import a folder of Markdown documents, retrieve cited and checksummed context packs through a single API endpoint, and preserve an append-only audit history of every piece of context an agent received. The platform is available as a hosted service and as an open-source core that teams can run themselves. ## Products & offering BaseMouse provides a Context Store (rev 0.3) that handles corpus ingestion, grounded context retrieval, and agent governance. Developers interact through a single API call that returns context packs with full provenance. The platform includes a governance demo, a design-partner intake flow, API access with a published rate card, open-source self-hosting, and documentation. ## Who it's for BaseMouse is built for engineering teams developing AI agents who need reliable, auditable context grounding rather than ad-hoc prompt stuffing. It is particularly relevant to teams that require provenance tracking, checksummed retrieval, and a verifiable record of what their agents were told during operation. ## Key pages - Home: https://basemouse.com - Pricing / Rate Card: https://basemouse.com/pricing - Documentation: https://basemouse.com/docs - Open Source: https://basemouse.com/open-source - API: https://basemouse.com/api - Governance Demo: https://basemouse.com/demo - Design Partner Intake: https://basemouse.com/design-partner ## Contact https://basemouse.com
Enter your domain for a free score in about 30 seconds. No email needed — see your score first, then unlock the full $29 audit.