(code or live); a non-empty meta description (code or live); a non-empty lang on <html> (code or live). **How to fix:** Give every route a specific title and description, and set lang on the root <html>. **Official sources:** [WHATWG HTML: the lang attribute](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/dom.html#the-lang-and-xml:lang-attributes), [Google: influencing title links](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/title-link), [Google: control your snippets](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/snippet) ### GEO-016: Key routes are reachable through server-rendered links Weight 2, medium severity. **In plain words:** crawlers find pages by following normal links. If a page can only be reached by a button or script, they may never find it. **Check in code:** look at navigation, footers and page content. Good links are `<a href>` or framework links that render one, such as `Link` or `RouterLink`. It's a problem if an important page is reached only through `onClick` with `navigate()`, or only appears after login or in a client-only menu. The home page doesn't need a link to it. Leave out dynamic routes whose real URLs you can't list; mention them under "Can't tell from code". **Can't tell from code:** whether links are in the served HTML when the app renders only in the browser. That's covered by GEO-003, so mention it there. **Checks:** at least one other crawled page links to the route in its raw server HTML (live only). **How to fix:** Link the route from server-rendered navigation or content with a plain <a href>. **Not a problem when:** Routes linked only from pages outside the crawl budget; raise --max-pages. **Official sources:** [Google: make your links crawlable](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/crawling-indexing/links-crawlable) ### GEO-017: Snippet restrictions do not conflict with an AI-search inclusion policy Weight 2, medium severity. **In plain words:** `nosnippet` and `max-snippet:0` stop search tools from quoting your page. If you want AI search to show you, these work against you. **Check in code:** this applies when the policy is to allow AI search, or when you assumed that goal under GEO-009. Search metadata and head tags for page-wide `nosnippet` and `max-snippet:0`. Also check code that sets `X-Robots-Tag`, such as middleware, `next.config` `headers()`, or server and CDN config in the repository. `data-nosnippet` on one element is a deliberate choice and is fine. **Can't tell from code:** headers added outside the repository. **Checks:** no nosnippet or max-snippet:0 in robots metadata (code or live); no nosnippet or max-snippet:0 in X-Robots-Tag (from source: no middleware or headers() that could set it) (code or live). **How to fix:** Remove page-wide nosnippet / max-snippet:0, or change the declared policy if exclusion is intended. **Not a problem when:** data-nosnippet on specific elements is not flagged; it is a scoped choice. **Official sources:** [Google: AI features and your website](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/ai-features), [Google: control your snippets](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/snippet), [Google: robots meta tag and X-Robots-Tag](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/crawling-indexing/robots-meta-tag) ### GEO-002: Selected accessibility checks pass on the rendered page Weight 1, low severity. **In plain words:** machines read pages much like screen readers do. Images need descriptions, and links and buttons need names. **Check in code:** check shared components and the main pages for `<img>` or image components with no `alt`, icon-only links or buttons with no accessible name, and pages with no title. Report what you actually read, and sample the most-used components rather than every file. **Can't tell from code:** the full rendered page. A clear result here means the code you sampled is clear, so say which components you read. **Checks:** image-alt, document-title, link-name, button-name on the rendered page (live only). **How to fix:** Fix the reported elements; see the axe-core rule pages. **Official sources:** [axe-core rule descriptions](https://github.com/dequelabs/axe-core/blob/develop/doc/rule-descriptions.md) ### GEO-101: Mobile app association files are served correctly Weight 2, medium severity. **In plain words:** if you have a mobile app, two small files prove that it and your website belong together, so links can open the app. **Check in code:** this applies only when the project declares a mobile app, through `profile: "app"` in `geo.config.json` or clear evidence the user confirms. Otherwise it's not applicable. Look for `.well-known/apple-app-site-association` and `.well-known/assetlinks.json` in the public folder or a route, and check they name the right app. **Can't tell from code:** whether they're served as JSON with no redirect. **Checks:** /.well-known/apple-app-site-association names the configured appIDs (live only); /.well-known/assetlinks.json names the configured package and fingerprints (live only). **How to fix:** Serve the association files at the documented paths with a 200, application/json, and no redirect. **Official sources:** [Apple: supporting associated domains](https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode/supporting-associated-domains), [Android: verify App Links](https://developer.android.com/training/app-links/verify-android-applinks) ### GEO-010: llms.txt presence (informational) For information only. Never scored. **In plain words:** `llms.txt` is an experimental idea for a file that guides AI tools. It's optional, and most sites don't have one. **Check in code:** note whether `public/llms.txt` or a route for it exists. Never count it, never call its absence a problem, and don't recommend it as a way to be found. **Can't tell from code:** nothing that matters. This rule is for information only. **How to fix:** None required. **Official sources:** [llms.txt proposal](https://llmstxt.org/) ### GEO-102: App-specific structured data (informational, app profile) For information only. Never scored. **In plain words:** app listings can use structured data to describe the app. It's useful context, but not a requirement. **Check in code:** when the project is an app, note any `SoftwareApplication` or `MobileApplication` JSON-LD. Never count it. **Can't tell from code:** nothing that matters. This rule is for information only. **How to fix:** None required. **Official sources:** [Google: structured data general guidelines](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/structured-data/sd-policies) ## Not requirements These old ideas were retired and aren't rules: GEO-001 (Q&A format mandate), GEO-005 (Word-count requirement), GEO-006 (Paragraph-length requirement), GEO-007 (FAQ / summary mandate), GEO-008 (Numbers / citations mandate). Don't recommend them.

` with no prerendering, is a problem for pages whose content matters. In server frameworks, flag a page whose main content is fetched only in the browser, such as inside `useEffect`. **Can't tell from code:** how much text really reaches crawlers when the setup is mixed, or when prerendering happens at the hosting layer. Say the code suggests this and a live check would confirm it. **Checks:** raw/rendered primary-text ratio is at least 0.5 when rendered text is 200+ characters (live only). **How to fix:** Render primary content on the server (a Server Component, SSR or static generation) and hydrate interactivity on top. **Not a problem when:** Pages whose primary content is intentionally interactive. **Official sources:** [Google: JavaScript SEO basics](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/crawling-indexing/javascript/javascript-seo-basics) ### GEO-004: Present JSON-LD parses and meets documented requirements Weight 2, medium severity. **In plain words:** structured data (JSON-LD) is a label that tells machines what a page is, such as a product or an article. A broken label gets ignored. Not having one is fine. **Check in code:** search for `application/ld+json`, for objects with `@context` and `@type`, and for JSON files with those keys. Check every one you find, including each entry in a list: a blank or misspelled key counts as a missing property. Literal JSON must be valid, and known types need their documented required properties. If there's no JSON-LD at all, the rule is not applicable, so don't count it against the user. **Can't tell from code:** values built at runtime or loaded from a CMS. **Checks:** every application/ld+json block is valid JSON (code or live); known types carry their documented required properties (code or live). **How to fix:** Fix the JSON syntax, then add the required properties for the declared @type. **Not a problem when:** Types GEO does not model are checked for parsing only. **Official sources:** [Google: structured data general guidelines](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/structured-data/sd-policies) ### GEO-011: A valid sitemap is discoverable and its URLs are reachable Weight 2, medium severity. **In plain words:** a sitemap is the list of pages you want found. `robots.txt` should point to it so crawlers can find that list. **Check in code:** find `sitemap.xml`, `app/sitemap.ts`, or a sitemap plugin or generator. Check that it's a valid sitemap and that `robots.txt` has an absolute `Sitemap:` line. A public site with no sitemap at all is a problem. If the code serves a sitemap through a route or library and `robots.txt` points to it, the rule is Clear, even when the URLs in it are built at runtime. **Can't tell from code:** whether listed URLs really answer 200, or what a runtime-built sitemap contains. List those under "Can't tell from code". They don't change the result. **Checks:** a sitemap exists and parses as urlset or sitemapindex (code or live); robots.txt carries a Sitemap: line (code or live); sampled listed URLs answer 200 (live only). **How to fix:** Publish a sitemap, reference it with an absolute Sitemap: line in robots.txt, and keep only reachable URLs in it. **Not a problem when:** Sitemaps submitted only through a search console; GEO cannot see those. **Official sources:** [sitemaps.org protocol](https://www.sitemaps.org/protocol.html), [RFC 9309: Robots Exclusion Protocol](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9309) ### GEO-012: Title, meta description and html lang are present Weight 2, medium severity. **In plain words:** the title and description are what people and machines read first about a page. The `lang` attribute tells them which language it's in. **Check in code:** find the root `` and check `lang`. For each important route, follow the metadata from the page up through its layouts. Every route needs a non-empty title and description. A site-wide default that makes every page look identical counts as a problem for the routes that share it. **Can't tell from code:** values loaded entirely from a CMS or API. **Checks:** a non-empty (code or live); a non-empty meta description (code or live); a non-empty lang on <html> (code or live). **How to fix:** Give every route a specific title and description, and set lang on the root <html>. **Official sources:** [WHATWG HTML: the lang attribute](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/dom.html#the-lang-and-xml:lang-attributes), [Google: influencing title links](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/title-link), [Google: control your snippets](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/snippet) ### GEO-016: Key routes are reachable through server-rendered links Weight 2, medium severity. **In plain words:** crawlers find pages by following normal links. If a page can only be reached by a button or script, they may never find it. **Check in code:** look at navigation, footers and page content. Good links are `<a href>` or framework links that render one, such as `Link` or `RouterLink`. It's a problem if an important page is reached only through `onClick` with `navigate()`, or only appears after login or in a client-only menu. The home page doesn't need a link to it. Leave out dynamic routes whose real URLs you can't list; mention them under "Can't tell from code". **Can't tell from code:** whether links are in the served HTML when the app renders only in the browser. That's covered by GEO-003, so mention it there. **Checks:** at least one other crawled page links to the route in its raw server HTML (live only). **How to fix:** Link the route from server-rendered navigation or content with a plain <a href>. **Not a problem when:** Routes linked only from pages outside the crawl budget; raise --max-pages. **Official sources:** [Google: make your links crawlable](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/crawling-indexing/links-crawlable) ### GEO-017: Snippet restrictions do not conflict with an AI-search inclusion policy Weight 2, medium severity. **In plain words:** `nosnippet` and `max-snippet:0` stop search tools from quoting your page. If you want AI search to show you, these work against you. **Check in code:** this applies when the policy is to allow AI search, or when you assumed that goal under GEO-009. Search metadata and head tags for page-wide `nosnippet` and `max-snippet:0`. Also check code that sets `X-Robots-Tag`, such as middleware, `next.config` `headers()`, or server and CDN config in the repository. `data-nosnippet` on one element is a deliberate choice and is fine. **Can't tell from code:** headers added outside the repository. **Checks:** no nosnippet or max-snippet:0 in robots metadata (code or live); no nosnippet or max-snippet:0 in X-Robots-Tag (from source: no middleware or headers() that could set it) (code or live). **How to fix:** Remove page-wide nosnippet / max-snippet:0, or change the declared policy if exclusion is intended. **Not a problem when:** data-nosnippet on specific elements is not flagged; it is a scoped choice. **Official sources:** [Google: AI features and your website](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/ai-features), [Google: control your snippets](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/snippet), [Google: robots meta tag and X-Robots-Tag](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/crawling-indexing/robots-meta-tag) ### GEO-002: Selected accessibility checks pass on the rendered page Weight 1, low severity. **In plain words:** machines read pages much like screen readers do. Images need descriptions, and links and buttons need names. **Check in code:** check shared components and the main pages for `<img>` or image components with no `alt`, icon-only links or buttons with no accessible name, and pages with no title. Report what you actually read, and sample the most-used components rather than every file. **Can't tell from code:** the full rendered page. A clear result here means the code you sampled is clear, so say which components you read. **Checks:** image-alt, document-title, link-name, button-name on the rendered page (live only). **How to fix:** Fix the reported elements; see the axe-core rule pages. **Official sources:** [axe-core rule descriptions](https://github.com/dequelabs/axe-core/blob/develop/doc/rule-descriptions.md) ### GEO-101: Mobile app association files are served correctly Weight 2, medium severity. **In plain words:** if you have a mobile app, two small files prove that it and your website belong together, so links can open the app. **Check in code:** this applies only when the project declares a mobile app, through `profile: "app"` in `geo.config.json` or clear evidence the user confirms. Otherwise it's not applicable. Look for `.well-known/apple-app-site-association` and `.well-known/assetlinks.json` in the public folder or a route, and check they name the right app. **Can't tell from code:** whether they're served as JSON with no redirect. **Checks:** /.well-known/apple-app-site-association names the configured appIDs (live only); /.well-known/assetlinks.json names the configured package and fingerprints (live only). **How to fix:** Serve the association files at the documented paths with a 200, application/json, and no redirect. **Official sources:** [Apple: supporting associated domains](https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode/supporting-associated-domains), [Android: verify App Links](https://developer.android.com/training/app-links/verify-android-applinks) ### GEO-010: llms.txt presence (informational) For information only. Never scored. **In plain words:** `llms.txt` is an experimental idea for a file that guides AI tools. It's optional, and most sites don't have one. **Check in code:** note whether `public/llms.txt` or a route for it exists. Never count it, never call its absence a problem, and don't recommend it as a way to be found. **Can't tell from code:** nothing that matters. This rule is for information only. **How to fix:** None required. **Official sources:** [llms.txt proposal](https://llmstxt.org/) ### GEO-102: App-specific structured data (informational, app profile) For information only. Never scored. **In plain words:** app listings can use structured data to describe the app. It's useful context, but not a requirement. **Check in code:** when the project is an app, note any `SoftwareApplication` or `MobileApplication` JSON-LD. Never count it. **Can't tell from code:** nothing that matters. This rule is for information only. **How to fix:** None required. **Official sources:** [Google: structured data general guidelines](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/structured-data/sd-policies) ## Not requirements These old ideas were retired and aren't rules: GEO-001 (Q&A format mandate), GEO-005 (Word-count requirement), GEO-006 (Paragraph-length requirement), GEO-007 (FAQ / summary mandate), GEO-008 (Numbers / citations mandate). Don't recommend them.