[geo-optimizer] GEO Audit Report — 2026-05-20

[github-actions[bot]]

GEO Audit Report — github/gh-aw

Audit Date: May 20, 2026
Run: §26178797978

This automated audit analyzes the AI visibility and citation potential of the gh-aw documentation site and GitHub repository README using the geo-optimizer-skill.

---

📊 Scores

Target	Score	Band	Status
Docs site (github.github.com/gh-aw/)	46/100	Foundation	🟡 Needs improvement
README (github.com/github/gh-aw)	55/100	Foundation	🟡 Needs improvement
Sitemap avg (20 pages)	31.7/100	Critical	🔴 Requires attention

Score breakdown (Docs site):

• ❌ Robots.txt: 0/18 — Missing
• ❌ llms.txt: 0/18 — Missing
• ✅ Schema: 12/16
• ✅ Meta tags: 14/14
• ✅ Content: 11/12
• ✅ Signals: 6/6
• ❌ AI discovery: 0/6
• 🟡 Brand/entity: 6/10
• ⚠️ Negative penalty: -3

Score breakdown (README):

• ✅ Robots.txt: 15/18
• ✅ llms.txt: 14/18
• ❌ Schema: 0/16 — Missing
• ✅ Meta tags: 11/14
• ✅ Content: 12/12
• 🟡 Signals: 3/6
• ❌ AI discovery: 0/6
• 🟡 Brand/entity: 3/10
• ⚠️ Negative penalty: -3

---

✅ Top Strengths

Docs site:

• ✅ Complete meta tags (title, description, OG tags, canonical)
• ✅ Rich content (1,213 words, 26 headings, good structure)
• ✅ Multiple JSON-LD schemas (WebSite, Organization, SoftwareApplication, FAQPage)
• ✅ RSS feed present with recent content (last update: May 9, 2026)
• ✅ Strong signals (lang tag, freshness indicators)
• ✅ High citability score: 84/100 across all platforms

README:

• ✅ Excellent robots.txt with AI bot allowlist (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, etc.)
• ✅ llms.txt present (2,905 words, 12 sections, 117 links)
• ✅ Comprehensive content (3,129 words, 43 headings)
• ✅ High citability score: 84/100 across all platforms
• ✅ Strong content structure with front-loading

---

🚨 Critical Gaps

Both targets share several critical issues that significantly harm AI visibility:

1. ❌ Hidden text cloaking penalty (both targets)

   • Display:none/visibility:hidden content detected
   • AI crawlers penalize this as potential cloaking
   • Impact: -3 points negative penalty

2. ❌ Keyword stuffing (both targets)

   • Docs: "github" at 3.7% density
   • README: "issue" at 22.9% density
   • Impact: Reduced trust signals, potential ranking penalty

3. ❌ Missing AI discovery endpoints (both targets, 0/6 points)

   • No /.well-known/ai.txt for crawler permissions
   • No /ai/summary.json, /ai/faq.json, /ai/service.json
   • Impact: AI engines cannot auto-discover structured metadata

4. ❌ Docs site robots.txt missing (0/18 points)

   • No explicit AI bot permission rules
   • Impact: Uncertain crawlability for ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI

5. ❌ Docs site llms.txt missing (0/18 points)

   • No LLM-friendly site summary
   • Impact: Reduced organizational signal for AI indexing

6. ❌ README missing JSON-LD schemas (0/16 points)

   • No Organization, WebSite, or FAQPage markup
   • Impact: Reduced entity disambiguation for Knowledge Graph

7. 🟡 Weak Knowledge Graph signals (both targets)

   • Docs: 2/4 KG pillars (LinkedIn, Wikidata; missing Wikipedia, Crunchbase)
   • README: 0/4 KG pillars
   • Impact: Reduced entity authority and trust

8. 🟡 Missing numerical data (docs site)

   • No statistics or concrete numbers
   • Impact: -40% AI visibility boost opportunity missed

---

🔧 Recommended Fixes (Priority Order)

🔥 High Impact (Do First)

1. Fix hidden text cloaking issue (both targets)

   • Audit all display:none and visibility:hidden CSS
   • Remove or refactor to avoid AI crawler penalties
   • Expected gain: +3 points (remove penalty)

2. Create docs site robots.txt with AI bot allowlist

   User-agent: GPTBot
   Allow: /
   
   User-agent: ClaudeBot
   Allow: /
   
   User-agent: PerplexityBot
   Allow: /
   
   User-agent: Google-Extended
   Allow: /

   • Expected gain: +18 points (docs), align with README best practice

3. Create docs site llms.txt

   geo llms --base-url https://github.github.com/gh-aw

   • Structure: H1, description, 3+ sections, internal links
   • Expected gain: +18 points (docs)

4. Add JSON-LD schemas to README

   • Organization schema with sameAs links (Wikipedia, Wikidata, LinkedIn, Crunchbase)
   • WebSite schema for homepage
   • FAQPage schema with common Q&A
   • Expected gain: +16 points (README)

5. Reduce keyword stuffing (both targets)

   • Docs: diversify "github" usage (use "the platform", "this tool", pronouns)
   • README: diversify "issue" usage (use "problem", "ticket", "bug report")
   • Expected gain: Remove negative signals, improve trust

🎯 Medium Impact (Next Phase)

6. Create AI discovery endpoints (both targets)

   • /.well-known/ai.txt — define crawler permissions
   • /ai/summary.json — site name, description, key URLs
   • /ai/faq.json — structured FAQ for AI search
   • /ai/service.json — service capabilities description
   • Expected gain: +6 points each

7. Add canonical link to README

   <link rel="canonical" href="https://github.com/github/gh-aw">

   • Expected gain: +3 points (README)

8. Enhance Knowledge Graph signals (both targets)

   • Add Wikipedia link if available
   • Add Crunchbase link for GitHub organization
   • Add more sameAs links to Organization schemas
   • Expected gain: +4 points (docs), +7 points (README)

9. Add numerical data to docs site

   • Include statistics, benchmarks, concrete numbers
   • Examples: "50+ workflows", "3-minute setup", "10x faster than X"
   • Expected gain: +40% AI visibility boost

10. Add RSS feed to README

    • Link releases/changelog feed in HTML head

    <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" href="...">

    • Expected gain: +3 points (README)

🧹 Low Impact (Polish)

11. Add /about page link to docs site

    • Build trust signals for AI
    • Expected gain: +1 point

12. Improve WebMCP readiness (both targets)

    • Add toolname/tooldescription attributes for Chrome AI
    • Add descriptive labels to forms
    • Expected gain: Future-proofing for AI agent interaction

13. Add form accessibility labels (docs site)

    • Ensure all forms have label/aria-label attributes
    • Expected gain: Improved AI agent usability

---

🤖 Platform-Specific Scores

📊 View ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI scores

Docs Site Platform Scores

Platform	Score	Top Strengths	Top Recommendations
ChatGPT	50/100	• FAQ schema • Well-structured content • High citability (84/100)	• Allow GPTBot in robots.txt • Add /llms.txt
Perplexity	65/100	• High citability (84/100) • Content freshness • RSS feed	• Allow PerplexityBot • Add /llms.txt
Google AI	70/100	• Complete meta tags • OG tags • sameAs links	• Allow Google-Extended • Add more schemas • Add /.well-known/ai.txt

README Platform Scores

Platform	Score	Top Strengths	Top Recommendations
ChatGPT	55/100	• GPTBot allowed • llms.txt present • High citability (84/100)	• Add FAQPage schema • Add Organization schema
Perplexity	70/100	• PerplexityBot allowed • llms.txt with links • High citability (84/100)	• Add freshness indicators
Google AI	45/100	• Google-Extended allowed • OG tags • High citability (84/100)	• Add JSON-LD schemas • Add canonical tag • Add /.well-known/ai.txt • Add sameAs links

---

📄 Sitemap Page Scores

View all 20 pages from sitemap audit

Most pages score in the Critical band (27–33/100), indicating widespread optimization needs:

URL	Score	Band
Homepage	46	Foundation
Blog index	33	Critical
Blog page 2	33	Critical
Blog page 6	33	Critical
Continuous Improvement	33	Critical
Blog page 3	32	Critical
Blog page 4	32	Critical
Continuous Refactoring	32	Critical
Blog page 5	31	Critical
Issue Management	31	Critical
Blog page 7	30	Critical
Welcome post	30	Critical
Advanced Analytics	30	Critical
Campaigns	30	Critical
Continuous Simplicity	30	Critical
Continuous Style	30	Critical
Creative Culture	30	Critical
Documentation	30	Critical
Interactive ChatOps	30	Critical
Agent Factory Status	27	Critical

Insight: Blog posts inherit docs site issues (missing robots.txt, llms.txt, AI discovery). Fixing site-wide issues will lift all pages.

---

🔐 Trust Stack Analysis

View detailed trust signals breakdown

Overall trust grade: C (medium trust level)

Composite score: 15/25 points

Category	Score	Strengths	Gaps
Technical Trust	3/5	• HTTPS • HSTS	• Missing Content-Security-Policy • Missing X-Frame-Options
Identity Trust	3/5	• Brand consistent • Contact info • Organization schema	• No about page link • No author attribution
Social Trust	4/5	• 6 sameAs links • 2/4 KG pillars • Reviews/testimonials	• No social media profile links
Academic Trust	1/5	• 14 external links	• No statistics/numbers • No authoritative sources (DOI, PubMed) • No references section
Consistency Trust	4/5	• Brand name consistent • No mixed signals • dateModified present	• Schema description differs from meta

Biggest opportunity: Academic Trust — add statistics, cite authoritative sources, add References section.

---

📈 Quick Wins Summary

If you can only do 3 things this week:

1. Fix hidden text cloaking → +3 points, remove penalties
2. Create docs robots.txt + llms.txt → +36 points to docs site
3. Add JSON-LD schemas to README → +16 points to README

Estimated combined impact: Docs site → 85/100 (Good band), README → 74/100 (Good band)

---

🔗 References

• §26178797978 — Workflow run
• GEO Optimizer Skill — Audit tool
• [llms.txt spec]((llmstxt.org/redacted) — LLM-friendly site summary format

Generated by 🌍 GEO Optimizer Daily Audit · ● 4.3M · ◷

• expires on May 23, 2026, 5:33 PM UTC

[github-actions[bot]]

This discussion has been marked as outdated by GEO Optimizer Daily Audit.

A newer discussion is available at Discussion #33811.