Outrings Web Intelligence

Check whether AI assistants can read and cite a site

check_ai_visibility

Read-onlyIdempotent

Measures technical crawler access and the page signals that affect whether an AI system can retrieve and parse a site. Reports, per crawler, whether GPTBot, OAI-SearchBot, ChatGPT-User, ClaudeBot, Claude-SearchBot, Claude-User, PerplexityBot, Google-Extended, Googlebot, Bingbot, Applebot-Extended and CCBot are allowed or blocked, naming the exact robots.txt rule responsible. Also checks whether content is served in HTML rather than requiring JavaScript, whether structured data is present and valid, and whether llms.txt exists. It also requests the page as Googlebot, Bingbot, OAI-SearchBot, PerplexityBot, GPTBot and ClaudeBot and compares each response with what a browser receives, reporting the robots.txt policy and what the server actually returned as separate columns. Crawler identity is declared in the User-Agent and not proven, so a refusal may not apply to the real crawler. It does NOT determine whether an assistant will rank, select, mention or cite the page: access is a precondition for citation, not a cause of it, and the crawlers serve different purposes: for OpenAI, OAI-SearchBot governs eligibility for ChatGPT search while GPTBot relates to model training. Use this to rule out or confirm a technical blocker, and say plainly that ranking and selection are outside what any measurement here can establish.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "check_ai_visibility"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	The website to inspect. A bare domain works: "example.com" is treated as https://example.com.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	Yes
`name`	No
`score`	Yes	Technical retrievability only. Not a prediction of citation.
`counts`	No	Checks by status. The last five are undetermined states and are never scored as passes.
`category`	Yes
`problems`	No	Blocked crawlers and missing signals, each naming the rule responsible.
`passingCount`	No
`undetermined`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 30, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / url / description

Previous value: -"The website to inspect. A bare domain works — \"example.com\" is treated as https://example.com."New value: +"The website to inspect. A bare domain works: \"example.com\" is treated as https://example.com."

Changed1 schema field changedAug 20, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "category": {
+      "const": "ai",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "counts": {
+      "description": "Checks by status. The last five are undetermined states and are never scored as passes.",
+      "properties": {
+        "blocked": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "fail": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "inconclusive": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "info": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "na": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "pass": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "requires_browser": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "timeout": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "unknown": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "warn": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "passingCount": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "problems": {
+      "description": "Blocked crawlers and missing signals, each naming the rule responsible.",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "fix": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "found": {
+            "description": "What was actually observed.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "description": "Stable check id, e.g. sec.csp.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "severity": {
+            "enum": [
+              "low",
+              "medium",
+              "high",
+              "critical",
+              null
+            ],
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "status": {
+            "enum": [
+              "fail",
+              "warn"
+            ],
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "why": {
+            "description": "Why it matters. Our reading, not the observation.",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "score": {
+      "description": "Technical retrievability only. Not a prediction of citation.",
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "undetermined": {
+      "items": {
+        "description": "A check that reached no verdict. Report it as undetermined, never as a pass.",
+        "properties": {
+          "id": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "reason": {
+            "enum": [
+              "unknown",
+              "blocked",
+              "timeout",
+              "inconclusive",
+              "requires_browser"
+            ],
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "url",
+    "category",
+    "score"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedAug 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Adds substantial behavior beyond annotations: it requests the page as multiple crawler user agents, compares responses to a browser, separates robots.txt policy from actual server response, and warns that crawler identity is declared rather than proven. These are important limits and operational details not captured by readOnly/openWorld/idempotent annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is long but front-loaded around what is measured and why it matters. Most detail earns its place by naming crawlers and clarifying limits, though the crawler list and repeated robots.txt-response framing make it denser than strictly necessary.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Complete for a read-only diagnostic tool: it explains scope, limitations, crawler semantics, and the distinction between access and citation. Since an output schema exists, the description does not need to explain return value structure.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already fully documents the single url parameter, including bare-domain handling. The description adds no further parameter-level meaning such as URL normalization rules or accepted protocols, so baseline 3 applies given 100% schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: measures crawler access and page signals that affect AI retrieval and parsing. It names the exact crawler checks and what is reported, clearly distinguishing this inspection tool from broader siblings like audit_website or get_score.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says to use this to rule out or confirm a technical blocker and clearly states what it does NOT establish, including ranking, selection, mention, or citation. It does not name sibling alternatives for broader audits, so it falls short of a full when-to-use versus alternatives guide.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Outrings Web Intelligence tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?