The four granular checks target clearly distinct artifacts (robots.txt, /llms.txt, page HTML structured data, XML sitemap), so they are easy to tell apart. quick_readiness_report overlaps in purpose with the other four because it aggregates them, but its description explicitly frames it as an all-in-one check, making the boundary understandable rather than confusing.

All names use snake_case and four of five follow a clean verb_noun pattern (check_ai_crawler_access, check_llms_txt, extract_structured_data, check_sitemap). quick_readiness_report deviates by using an adjective instead of a verb, but it remains readable and clearly signals its composite role.

Five tools is well-scoped for a 'lite' readiness checker: one convenient aggregate plus four focused checks, each earning its place. There is no bloat or thin single-tool surface.

The surface covers the declared readiness areas fully: AI crawler access, llms.txt, structured data/canonical, and sitemap, plus a prioritized aggregate report. Minor gaps remain, such as page-level meta robots/noindex checking and broader indexability diagnostics, but these are reasonable omissions for a lite tool.