Skip to main content
Glama
AutomateLab-tech

automatelab-ai-seo

Official

generate_llms_txt

Generate a spec-compliant llms.txt file for a domain by reading its sitemap, sampling pages, and synthesizing a grouped summary. Optionally creates llms-full.txt with full page text.

Instructions

Generate a spec-compliant llms.txt (and optionally llms-full.txt) for a domain by reading its sitemap, sampling up to max_pages pages, and synthesizing a grouped, sectioned summary.

Read-only. Issues one HTTP GET for the sitemap then one per sampled page.

Deterministic; no LLM. Output is the file content as a string - this tool does NOT write to disk or upload anywhere. The caller is responsible for hosting the resulting file at https://<domain>/llms.txt.

When to use: bootstrapping llms.txt for a site you own. To check an existing llms.txt, use validate_llms_txt instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesHostname or origin to generate llms.txt for. Examples: `example.com`, `https://example.com`. The tool reads the domain's sitemap, fetches up to `max_pages` of them, and synthesizes a spec-compliant llms.txt grouped by section. Issues N+1 HTTP GETs: one for the sitemap, then one per sampled page. Read-only.
max_pagesNoHow many pages to sample from the sitemap when building section groupings. Default 30. Each page is fetched (one HTTP GET per page) - keep this low for large sites or rate-limited hosts.
include_fullNoIf true, also generate llms-full.txt (the expanded variant containing full page text, not just URLs and titles). Default false. The llms-full.txt output can be large; only enable when you actually plan to host both files.
site_nameNoOverride the site name used in the generated llms.txt header. If omitted, inferred from the homepage's <title> tag.
site_descriptionNoOverride the site description used in the generated llms.txt header. If omitted, inferred from the homepage's meta description.
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully covers behavior: read-only, issues HTTP GETs, deterministic, no LLM, output is string, does not write to disk, caller responsible for hosting. This is comprehensive and sets proper expectations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Description is concise and well-structured: first para states purpose, second para details behavior and output, third para gives usage guidance. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Covers purpose, behavior, side effects, output, caller responsibility, and usage guidance. Minor gap: does not detail the exact structure of the generated llms.txt file, but it is described as 'spec-compliant' and the spec is external. Overall quite complete.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description reiterates some parameter details (e.g., domain, max_pages) but does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

The description clearly states the tool generates a spec-compliant llms.txt (and optionally llms-full.txt) by reading a sitemap, sampling pages, and synthesizing a summary. It distinguishes from sibling tool 'validate_llms_txt' by explicitly noting the alternative for checking existing files.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides explicit when-to-use ('bootstrapping llms.txt for a site you own') and when-not-to-use ('To check an existing llms.txt, use validate_llms_txt instead'), giving clear context and an alternative.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/AutomateLab-tech/ai-seo-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server