Free tools for common technical checks
Choose the file or markup you need to inspect. Each tool shows what it found and where the problem is.
Robots.txt checker
Fetch or paste a robots.txt file, test a specific URL and user-agent, inspect AI crawler access, and see the matched rule.
Open checkerStructured data testing tool
Parse JSON-LD and validate types and fields. Schema.org structure is separate from Google Rich Results eligibility.
Open testerllms.txt generator
Generate and validate a community-proposed llms.txt file with sections and links. Copy or download the output.
Open generatorChoose by evidence
Use the smallest tool that can answer the question
Each checker accepts different evidence and returns a different kind of result. The last column is as important as the output because a technical check should not be presented as proof of indexing, ranking, or citation.
| Question and tool | Input | Output | Cannot prove |
|---|---|---|---|
Robots.txt checker Which robots.txt rule applies to this exact path and user-agent? Check a rule | A public page or robots.txt URL, or pasted file text, plus the path and named user-agent. | The matched group and rule, allow or disallow decision, syntax findings, sitemap declarations, and a crawler matrix. | That a crawler fetched, indexed, ranked, or cited the page. Robots.txt controls crawling, not inclusion in an index. |
Structured data testing tool Does this page or pasted JSON-LD parse, and do its types and fields contain usable values? Test JSON-LD | A public page URL or a JSON-LD block. | Parsed nodes and types, JSON and shape problems, field-level evidence, warnings, and specific fixes. | Google rich-result eligibility, agreement with every visible claim on the page, ranking, or use by an AI provider. |
llms.txt generator and validator Can I create or validate a small llms.txt file with readable sections and links? Build or validate a file | A site name, short summary, section labels, and public links, or an existing llms.txt file. | A copyable file plus findings for headings, summaries, sections, URLs, duplicate links, and vague labels. | That any crawler reads the file or that it improves discovery, retrieval, ranking, or citation. The format is a community proposal. |
Standards and source boundaries
The checkers use public rules and deliberately keep separate questions separate. Read the underlying source when a result affects a production site.
RFC 9309: Robots Exclusion Protocol
Defines the protocol's record, matching, and access-result behavior for compliant crawlers.
A correct robots decision does not show whether a crawler visited the URL or whether a search system indexed it.
Read RFC 9309Schema.org getting started guide
Explains the shared vocabulary used to describe entities and properties, including JSON-LD examples.
Using a Schema.org type does not by itself make a page eligible for a Google search feature.
Read the Schema.org guideGoogle Search structured data documentation
Explains how Google uses structured data and links to feature-specific requirements and policies.
CiteCheckup's structure test is independent and does not replace Google's Rich Results Test or Search Console.
Read Google's documentationThe llms.txt proposal
Describes the proposed Markdown file, summary, sections, and linked resources.
It is not a web standard and the proposal does not establish crawler adoption or ranking benefit.
Read the proposal