AI readiness report
www.rfc-editor.org
11/15
Consistently cited
Positioning: English-language site aimed abroad (overseas). The hard gate depends on this: an English-language site is measured on the international AI crawlers, a Chinese-language site on the China ecosystem.
Fix in this order
- C3 There is original data or first-hand information 93% of the sites we have measured fail this check — it is the common case, not an edge case.
- B2 Structured data (JSON-LD) is present 86% of the sites we have measured fail this check — it is the common case, not an edge case.
- C4 There is a visible last-updated date 86% of the sites we have measured fail this check — it is the common case, not an edge case.
- B4 An llms.txt is present 79% of the sites we have measured fail this check — it is the common case, not an edge case.
A. Can AI reach you?
Can an AI engine reach the page at all?
-
A1 robots.txt allows the AI crawlers Pass
All 11 international AI crawlers may fetch the site (0 declared explicitly).
-
A2 Content is in the HTML, not only after JavaScript Pass
The raw HTML already contains 1654 characters of readable text, so a crawler that does not run JavaScript can read the page.
-
A3 A sitemap exists Pass
The sitemap is valid XML and lists 2 URL(s); first entry: https://www.rfc-editor.org/sitemap-1.xml.
-
A4 No dead-link pollution Pass
0 of 18 checked internal link(s) failed (0.0%), below the 1% threshold.
-
A5 Reachable and HTTPS is valid Pass
The homepage answers HTTP 200 over HTTPS and certificate valid for 47 more day(s); no mixed content found.
B. Can AI understand who you are?
Can it tell who you are and what the page is about?
-
B2 Structured data (JSON-LD) is present Fail
No application/ld+json block was found.
How to fix it. Add a JSON-LD block to the homepage HTML — for example a WebSite or Organization object — since no application/ld+json block was found. Put it in the raw HTML so it is present without JavaScript.tailored to this site
-
B4 An llms.txt is present Fail
No llms.txt was found at the site root.
How to fix it. Publish an llms.txt file at the site root that describes the site and links to its key pages; no llms.txt was found there. Reference the pages already listed in the sitemap so the file points to real URLs.tailored to this site
-
B1 Title and description are complete Pass
Title (10 chars): "RFC Editor"; description (153 chars) present.
-
B3 Heading hierarchy is semantic Pass
One <h1> and a well-formed hierarchy: [2, 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3].
-
B5 The operator behind the site is verifiable Pass
2 trust signal(s) found: an about/contact link, an email address.
C. Will AI choose to cite you?
Will it choose to quote you rather than someone else?
-
C3 There is original data or first-hand information Fail
Only 0 percentage figure(s) and 0 data point(s) were found — mostly generic prose.
How to fix it. Add first-hand data to the page content, such as figures or tables produced by the site itself; the check found 0 percentage figures and 0 data points, so the text reads as generic prose. Keep the figures in the HTML rather than behind JavaScript.tailored to this site
This rule cannot decide reliably on its own (confidence 60%), so treat it as a suggestion rather than a verdict.
-
C4 There is a visible last-updated date Fail
No updated date was found in the page text or metadata.
How to fix it. Show a last-updated date in the page text or metadata, because none was found in either place. A visible date lets crawlers and readers tell how current the content is.tailored to this site
-
C1 The conclusion comes first Pass
The first paragraph (260 chars) opens with a statement: "RFCs outline computer networking and Internet foundations, including Internet Standards and historical or informative content. They are pub…".
-
C2 There are extractable structure blocks Pass
Found 18 list(s) with 3+ items — these can be lifted out of the page as a self-contained answer.
-
C5 There is third-party reference evidence Pass
9 distinct external domain(s) referenced, including recognised sources: github.com.
Analysis · written from the measurements above
The site is already readable by AI crawlers without JavaScript and its trust and structure signals are in place, but four gaps remain: no JSON-LD structured data, no llms.txt, no original data or first-hand figures, and no visible last-updated date. The fastest wins are adding a JSON-LD block and an llms.txt file at the site root, since both are simple, self-contained additions that need no content rewriting. After that, adding a visible last-updated date and at least one concrete data point would address the remaining two failures.
Score history
Unchanged at 11 since the first measurement.
| Measured | Score | Change | Fixed | Newly failing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23 Sep, 08:44 First measurement | 11 / 15 | — | — | — |
| 23 Sep, 09:07 No item changes | 11 / 15 | 0 | — | — |
Share this result
Next step
Apply the failing checks above in group order — group A first, because a site that cannot be reached or read cannot be cited. Then recheck to see the score move.
The pack contains robots.txt, llms.txt and a JSON-LD
block, plus a deploy script that is a dry run by default and backs
up anything it replaces, and a verify script that confirms the deploy landed.
Report generated 2026-09-23T09:07:27 (UTC).