Is The Guardian AI-ready?
No.
The Guardian scores 49/100 for AI search readiness. AI crawlers struggle to access or read this site in its current state.
Can AI crawlers get in?
What theguardian.com/robots.txt says to each crawler.
- GPTBotOpenAIPartial
- PerplexityBotPerplexityBlocked
- ClaudeBotAnthropicBlocked
- Google-ExtendedGooglePartial
Key signals
What an answer engine finds on the homepage.
llms.txt
Not found
llms-full.txt
Not found
Sitemap
461 URLs
Schema.org JSON-LD
None
Text in initial HTML
2,817 words
Response time
58 ms
Biggest wins
What The Guardian could fix first
- 1
llms.txt is present and valid
Bot access+5 pts possibleGenerate an llms.txt below and upload it to your site root.
- 2
PerplexityBot can crawl
Bot access+4 pts possibleAdd "User-agent: PerplexityBot" with "Allow: /" to robots.txt (and remove any matching Disallow rules).
- 3
ClaudeBot can crawl
Bot access+4 pts possibleAdd "User-agent: ClaudeBot" with "Allow: /" to robots.txt (and remove any matching Disallow rules).
- 4
OpenGraph tags
Semantic metadata+4 pts possibleAdd the missing OpenGraph tags — AI search cards reuse them.
- 5
Schema.org JSON-LD
Semantic metadata+4 pts possibleAdd Organization and WebSite JSON-LD (plus Product, Article or FAQPage where relevant).
Every check
The full breakdown
Snapshot of the homepage measured on 28 October 2026 with the same live crawl as the free LLMready audit. A high score means AI engines can reach, read and understand a site. It doesn't guarantee citations — those also depend on authority, relevance and the question being asked. Sites change — run a fresh audit for today's result.
Media and publishing ranking
Full benchmarkMedian 64/100 across 6 measured media and publishing sites (all sites: 77).
Similar scores elsewhere
Sites in other industries that landed close to 49.
How does your site compare to The Guardian?
Get the same breakdown for your site — crawler access, extractability, metadata and citation readiness — plus a generated llms.txt. F is the bar to beat.