If someone has told you that your website needs an llms.txt file to appear in Google’s AI answers, ask them to explain that recommendation against Google’s own documentation.
In its guide to optimising for generative AI features, Google says Search ignores llms.txt. Maintaining one does not help or harm Google Search visibility or rankings. The guide also distinguishes discovering a file from treating it as a special signal.
That is a specific statement about Google Search, not a claim that no other system could use the file. If you have a documented use for another service, evaluate that separately. The mistake is selling a Google ranking benefit that Google explicitly says does not exist.
A file is easier to sell than an editorial decision
An llms.txt deliverable is tidy. It can be created, checked off and included in a report. Making a useful page is harder: someone has to decide what the reader needs, gather evidence and explain the answer clearly.
Consider a development agency with a vague service page. A machine-readable summary cannot supply the missing project examples, clarify an ambiguous offer or explain who will maintain the website after launch. Those are weaknesses in the underlying material.
This does not make every proposed technical improvement unnecessary. It means the improvement should have a clear purpose and evidence behind it. “AI readiness” is too broad to serve as the acceptance criterion.
Check whether the important pages can be found
Google’s AI features guidance says supporting pages need to be indexed and eligible to appear with a snippet. It also points to crawl access, internal links and important information being available as text.
Start with your priority service pages, not every URL at once. Check their response status, indexing directives, canonical addresses and links from the rest of the site. Inspect whether a deployment rule or security setting is accidentally blocking legitimate search access.
A real review should name the affected URL and the observed problem. A report that simply says “improve technical SEO” leaves the next person to do the investigation again.
Make the page worth arriving at
Technical eligibility is a threshold, not a reason to choose your business. A visitor still needs a clear answer and a reason to trust it.
For a service page, explain what the work includes, who it is suitable for and what affects the scope. Show real work where you have permission. For a comparison, explain the trade-offs rather than arranging every category so your preferred platform wins.
Google’s generative AI optimisation guide also rejects the idea that pages must be chopped into tiny chunks or rewritten into a special AI style. Our editorial conclusion is straightforward: organise the page around the reader’s decisions, not a ritual intended to impress a model.
Connect the explanation to the next useful page
An article answering a migration question should not be a dead end. It can lead to a relevant service, a project that demonstrates the work and a way to discuss the reader’s situation.
That does not mean placing the same sales link under every paragraph. Use a link where it resolves a natural next question. For example, a discussion of content modelling can point to Sanity development, while an explanation of a managed visual workflow can point to our Webflow agency page.
Check the destination too. A descriptive link to a thin, outdated page only moves the disappointment one click further along.
Measure visibility without confusing it with revenue
The Generative AI performance report in Search Console reports impressions for Google’s AI search features. The documentation notes that insufficient activity can affect whether the report appears. Its data does not establish that a mention became a customer.
Review it alongside the performance of the pages involved and the enquiries your business receives. Keep dates and definitions consistent. If an enquiry was influenced by several channels, say so rather than assigning certainty to one touchpoint.
For a small business, a practical report can be quite short: which relevant pages became more visible, which journeys improved and what the sales team learned from the resulting conversations.
What to do this week
- Choose three pages tied to services you genuinely want to sell.
- Verify that they are accessible, indexable and linked from relevant places.
- Replace vague claims with useful scope, evidence and examples.
- Make the next step clear and check that it works.
- Record a baseline and agree when to review progress.
If an llms.txt file already exists, there is no need for a dramatic removal project on Google’s behalf. Just stop treating it as the strategy.
Our SEO and conversion work focuses on the pages and journeys that can create a useful enquiry. For the commercial side of the question, read why an AEO audit needs a path to pipeline.
