Free AI visibility tools
Six checks that show how AI assistants see your brand today. Enter a URL, get an answer. No signup, no credit card.
These answer what your site looks like. Not whether AI recommends you.
A free account runs five of your own prompts through ChatGPT, Gemini, Google AI Overviews, and Grok on one URL. You see which brands come back, whether yours is one of them, and which pages got cited.
Get started freeWhat AI visibility tools actually measure
When someone asks ChatGPT or Perplexity to recommend a product in your category, the answer comes back as a short list of names. You are on it or you are not. There is no page two to climb to, and no ranking to improve by a place at a time.
That makes AI visibility a different problem from search rankings, and the tools that measure it fall into two groups. The first group looks at your website and asks whether an AI system can read and trust it. The second asks the models directly and records what they say. Both matter, and they answer different questions.
The six checks on this page are the first kind. They are fast, they need nothing but a URL, and they tell you whether the groundwork is in place. Whether the models actually recommend you is a separate question, and the only way to answer it is to ask them.
What each check tells you
Can AI crawlers reach your content?
Every model that cites live sources has a crawler behind it - GPTBot for OpenAI, ClaudeBot for Anthropic, PerplexityBot for Perplexity. If your robots.txt blocks them, nothing else on this page matters, and plenty of sites block them without realising. Blocking Google-Extended in particular is a decision many teams made during the 2023 scraping debate and never revisited.
Can they make sense of what they find?
Reaching a page is not the same as understanding it. Our site audit scores six things AI systems lean on: accessibility, content structure, structured data, technical SEO, performance, and E-E-A-T signals. One recurring failure is worth naming - if your site renders in the browser with JavaScript, most AI crawlers see an empty shell, because they do not run JavaScript the way a browser does.
Have you told them what your site is?
llms.txt is an emerging convention: a plain markdown file at the root of your site that says what you do and points to the pages worth reading. Our llms.txt generator builds one from your own pages. No model is required to read it and it is not a ranking factor, but it costs nothing to publish and it removes the guesswork for the ones that do.
Do independent sources describe you?
Models weight what others say about you far more heavily than what you say about yourself. Wikipedia and Grokipedia entries carry particular weight, and it is worth knowing not just whether an entry exists but what it cites. An entry sourced mostly from your own domain is the model repeating your words back; one sourced from independent coverage is something closer to corroboration. Reddit threads matter for the same reason, and get cited unusually often in AI answers.
Where are the gaps you could fill?
Our content ideas check asks an AI assistant what it recommends in your category, looks at the pages it cited, and turns those into articles you could publish. The pages a model already trusts are the clearest available signal of what it considers a credible answer.
What these tools cannot tell you
Every check here is a snapshot of your site, not a measurement of your standing in AI answers. A perfect score means a model can read you properly. It does not mean it picks you.
For that you need the second kind of tool: run the questions your buyers actually ask through the models, and record which brands come back, how often, and which sources those answers lean on. That is what nonBot AI does, and a free account covers one URL with five prompts across four models. No card required.
Run the checks on this page first. They are free, they take seconds, and a blocked crawler or an unreadable site will undermine everything else you do.