llms.txt checker vs validator: a draft-to-live worked example
Our checker and validator run the same core checks. Choose either entry point, paste a draft, fix the warnings and then check the live domain on that page. You do not need to run two overlapping tools.
First, know what the result means
The current llms.txt proposal requires an H1; summaries and link sections provide useful context, and Optional is a convention. It also permits files under subpaths such as /docs/llms.txt. This site’s live tool checks only the root /llms.txt.
Our score uses a stricter editorial checklist: a descriptive summary, Core pages, at least three links and an Optional heading. Missing these may lower our score even when the proposal permits the draft. Link parsing does not prove that every destination works. Privacy warnings need human review.
Google’s AI Overviews and AI Mode do not require new AI text files. Creating llms.txt is not a ranking promise. Source: Google’s AI features guidance.
1. Paste this intentionally risky example
Illustrative fixture, not a customer case study. The example.com URLs are placeholders; DEMO_PLACEHOLDER is not a real credential. Paste checks stay in your browser. Never paste a genuine secret into a public demo.
# Example Support
> Example Support provides public setup instructions and a product reference for its users.
Important notes:
- Use the public reference as the source for product capabilities.
## Core pages
- [Setup instructions](https://example.com/docs/setup): Public setup guide
- [Account dashboard](https://example.com/account/profile?token=DEMO_PLACEHOLDER): Customer-specific page
- [Local preview](http://localhost:3000/docs): Local draft
## Optional
- [Security overview](https://example.com/security): Public policyTested local result: the report flags possible private data. The account path and token-shaped parameter need review; localhost is not a public destination. A syntactically valid URL is not automatically appropriate to publish.
2. Replace the risky destinations, then run Analyze again
# Example Support
> Example Support provides public setup instructions and a product reference for its users.
Important notes:
- Use the public reference as the source for product capabilities.
## Core pages
- [Setup instructions](https://example.com/docs/setup): Public setup guide
- [Product reference](https://example.com/docs/reference): Public product reference
- [Support overview](https://example.com/support): Public support options
## Optional
- [Security overview](https://example.com/security): Public policyTested local result: this fixture passes all ten house-checklist checks and reports no obvious private data. That is a static-check result, not proof that the placeholder pages exist. Replace the host and manually open each real destination before publishing.
Copy the validation report after the check. If clipboard access is unavailable, select the report text and copy it manually. Keep the reviewed URLs and a short explanation of any accepted warning in your release note.
3. Check the live file separately
- After publishing your own file, open
https://your-domain.example/llms.txtdirectly. Confirm the body is the intended text, not an HTML login page. - In the same validator page, enter the public domain without credentials or query parameters. This sends the domain to this site’s server and fetches the public root file.
- Read HTTP status, content type, structure and warnings, then copy the live report. A draft pass does not verify the uploaded response.
- If the file is missing, correct its location; if the tool cannot run, check the domain and network response. Private IPs and local names are intentionally refused. This tool does not validate subpath-only files.
4. Save evidence without inventing an outcome
Draft reviewed: [date and file revision]
Warnings reviewed: [what changed; any accepted warning]
Live file: [public /llms.txt URL]
Live HTTP status and content type: [observed values]
Report saved: [local file or ticket]
Linked pages manually checked: [date / unresolved items]
Crawler traffic, citations and rankings: not inferred from this checkWhat not to count as proof
Our tests cover the two fixtures and copy/report flows. They do not demonstrate better AI answers, rankings or a customer’s production results. For crawl policy questions, continue with the robots.txt troubleshooting examples.
Common questions
Is an llms.txt checker different from an llms.txt validator?
On this site they share the core checks. Use one page for the pasted draft and the live domain; the live fetch is a separate check of the published response.
Should I create llm txt from my full sitemap?
Not blindly. Use the sitemap as an inventory, then choose accurate public resources. Do not copy account, staging or customer-specific links into a public file.