Skip to main content
Glama

llms.txt Generator

by de.llms-txt-generator
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Check a website's published llms.txt

check_published_llms_txt
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when the user asks whether a website already has an llms.txt, whether it is served correctly, or why PageSpeed Insights / Lighthouse flags it. Requests exactly one URL, https:///llms.txt, and reports HTTP status, content type, redirects, the file content, the format validation and the Lighthouse result. Does not crawl other pages and does not change anything on the site. Messages are in German.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesDomain or any URL of the website, e.g. "example.com".

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes
noteNo
foundYes
statusYes
contentNo
messageNo
redirectsNo
lighthouseNoResult of the three Lighthouse 13.3 "llms-txt" audit rules.
validationNoFormat check against the llmstxt.org proposal.
contentTypeNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / url / description
      Previous value: -"Domain oder beliebige URL der Website, z. B. \"beispiel.de\"."New value: +"Domain or any URL of the website, e.g. \"example.com\"."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "content": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "contentType": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "found": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "lighthouse": {
+      "description": "Result of the three Lighthouse 13.3 \"llms-txt\" audit rules.",
+      "properties": {
+        "checks": {
+          "items": {
+            "properties": {
+              "failureMessage": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "id": {
+                "enum": [
+                  "h1",
+                  "links",
+                  "length"
+                ],
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "label": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "passed": {
+                "type": "boolean"
+              }
+            },
+            "required": [
+              "id",
+              "passed"
+            ],
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "passed": {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "passed",
+        "checks"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "message": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "note": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "redirects": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "validation": {
+      "description": "Format check against the llmstxt.org proposal.",
+      "properties": {
+        "byteSize": {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "issues": {
+          "items": {
+            "properties": {
+              "code": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "line": {
+                "type": "number"
+              },
+              "message": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "severity": {
+                "enum": [
+                  "error",
+                  "warning",
+                  "info"
+                ],
+                "type": "string"
+              }
+            },
+            "required": [
+              "code",
+              "severity",
+              "message"
+            ],
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "links": {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "score": {
+          "maximum": 100,
+          "minimum": 0,
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "valid": {
+          "description": "true when no error-level finding exists.",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "valid",
+        "score",
+        "issues"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "url",
+    "found",
+    "status"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description still adds substantial context: exactly one request to https://<domain>/llms.txt, the reported fields (status, content type, redirects, content, validation, Lighthouse result), no crawling, and the non-obvious behavioral trait that messages are returned in German.

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?

Front-loads the when-to-use triggers, then the request behavior, then the negative constraints. Dense but every sentence carries information; the trailing 'Messages are in German' is short and materially useful rather than filler.

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?

An output schema exists, yet the description still enumerates the returned fields, so the agent knows what it will get back. Combined with the safety notes and the German-language disclosure, nothing needed to select or invoke the tool correctly is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and there is a single parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by specifying what the tool does with the input: a domain or any site URL is normalized into a single GET of https://<domain>/llms.txt, which tells the agent the input need not already be the file URL.

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+resource (check a website's *published* llms.txt) and scopes it precisely: it fetches the live file rather than generating or validating a local one. That scope distinguishes it from generate_llms_txt and validate_llms_txt without opening their schemas.

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?

Gives explicit trigger conditions ('when the user asks whether a website already has an llms.txt, whether it is served correctly, or why Lighthouse flags it') and an exclusion ('does not crawl other pages'). It stops short of naming the sibling tools as alternatives for the generate/validate cases, so it is clear but not fully routed.

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

All llms.txt Generator toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Let your AI agent see the webWeb-to-screenshot MCP for Claude, Cursor and Codex. No cookie banners. Free to start.snap-render.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources