Free AI visibility checker: two benchmarks, one report, no sign-up

Type a domain into the free AI visibility checker and, one to three minutes later, you have a report on how that domain looks to the systems that decide what an AI answer cites. There's no account. You give us the domain and an email, we send the finished report there, and that's the only email you'll get from it.

Most teams have never seen their own site the way an AI agent reads it. That's the gap this closes, for free, in the time it takes to make a coffee.

What it measures

Two benchmarks, both built from public signals only.

CITE is domain authority for the AI-search era. It asks four questions: how strongly the domain is referenced, in links and in AI citations (Citation); whether knowledge graphs recognise it as a distinct entity (Identity); whether there are manipulation red flags or security gaps (Trust); and how visible it is across platforms (Eminence). Those roll up into one weighted score from 0 to 100 with a verdict: SHIP, FIX, or BLOCK. Scoring is per domain type, so a local service isn't graded against a publisher.

TALE is the narrative benchmark. Is the story materially true and defensible (Truth)? Is the message system internally consistent (Architecture)? Do the flagship pages deliver it without contradicting each other (Landing)? Are the effectiveness claims measured or merely asserted (Evidence)? TALE reports two independent reads, Truth and System, and never averages them. A coherent story can't make up for a false claim, so it isn't allowed to.

Benchmark	The question it answers	What you get
CITE	Will AI systems trust and cite this domain?	One weighted 0–100 score and a SHIP / FIX / BLOCK verdict, scored per domain type
TALE	Does the site tell one true, consistent story?	Two reads, Truth and System, reported separately and never averaged

What it leaves out, on purpose

Any dimension that would need a paid backlink or keyword database is excluded. Both scores rest on evidence anyone can verify, and every item in the report names the evidence behind it. That choice has a cost. The scores are advisory and peer-relative: they estimate citation-trust signals, and they don't predict rankings or revenue.

Why now

What AI crawlers see

Top-1,000 sites, readable subset (n = 711)

ModPageSpeed, May 2026

57% show a nearly empty page (403 sites) · 43% show their content (308 sites)

One number pushed us to build this. 57% of the top 1,000 sites show AI crawlers a nearly empty page, 403 of the 711 that could be read at all (ModPageSpeed, May 2026). And no major AI crawler executes JavaScript, across more than 500 million GPTBot fetches in the server logs (Vercel × MERJ, December 2024). So a page that renders beautifully for a person can reach a model as a header and a footer. You wouldn't know unless you looked, and looking used to mean hiring someone.

How to read the result, and what to do with it

Start with the items marked fail or partial. Each one carries its evidence and a fix. The cheap ones (a missing entity in structured data, a security header, two pages that contradict each other) are usually an afternoon's work. Then run it again. The checker scores the same public signals every time, so before-and-after is a fair comparison.

If the report shows content that never reaches a crawler, that's the part SiftServe is built for: an AI-readable version of each page, approved by you, served to AI agents at the edge. Request a demo and bring the report. It's the agenda.