insforge.dev

Whether agents can crawl you, find you in the registries and searches they check, and trust what they find.

• ✓Sitemap present & freshrequired4/4

  Sitemap at https://insforge.dev/sitemap.xml: 100 entries, freshest <lastmod> 2026-08-12 (6 days ago)

  Resolved the sitemap from robots.txt or /sitemap.xml, validated XML, and checked lastmod freshness

  spec ↗report issue
• ✓Brand search discoverabilityrequired4/4

  Both searches ("InsForge" and "InsForge infrastructure devops") cited insforge.dev: https://insforge.dev/, https://docs.insforge.dev/llms.txt, https://docs.insforge.dev/introduction.md, https://insforge.dev/blog/inside-the-ai-agent-stack, https://docs.insforge.dev/core-concepts/sites/overview

  Ran clean brand-name web searches and checked whether your domain is cited in the results

  report issue
• —MCP registry listingsrecommendedna

  No MCP server detected for this product

  Queried the official MCP registry, Smithery, Glama, and PulseMCP for servers matching your domain

  spec ↗report issue

Whether your robots policy, bot protection, and agent guidance actively admit AI agents instead of blocking them.

• ✓robots.txt present & parseablerequired2/2

  /robots.txt parses: 2 User-agent group(s), 2 Sitemap line(s)

  Fetched /robots.txt and validated it parses as a robots policy

  spec ↗report issue
• ✓AI crawler policyrequired5/5

  All 12 AI crawler user-agents (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, …) are allowed at / by robots.txt

  Evaluated robots.txt groups for the major AI agent user-agents (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, …)

  report issue
• ✗Content Signals directivesemerging0/2

  No Content-Signal lines in robots.txt

  fix → Declare Content Signals in robots.txt (e.g. `Content-Signal: search=yes, ai-train=no`) to express AI usage preferences machine-readably.

  Looked for Content-Signal lines in robots.txt

  spec ↗report issue
• ✓Agent user-agent paritybetarequired4/4

  All three UAs get HTTP 200; bot bodies are ClaudeBot 100%, GPTBot 100% of the browser response (239908 bytes)

  Compared responses served to browser and AI-agent user-agents (informational while in beta)

  report issue
• ✓agents.mdrecommended3/3

  Found https://insforge.dev/agents.md: 5654 chars of markdown with 7 heading(s)

  Fetched /agents.md and checked for substantive agent guidance

  spec ↗report issue

Whether your pages carry machine-readable identity: structured data, llms.txt, clear copy an agent can quote.

• ✓Homepage states what you arerequired3/3

  Homepage clarity rated 5/5 — an agent can confidently say what this company does (model's one-sentence read: "InsForge is an agent-native cloud infrastructure platform providing a comprehensive suite of backend services like database, authentication, storage, and AI model gateway, specifically designed for AI coding agents to operate end-to-end through a CLI and skills.")

  An LLM read your homepage as an agent would and rated how confidently it could say what you do

  report issue
• ✓OpenGraph / social metadatarecommended2/2

  Homepage has og:title, og:description, and og:image (twitter:card="summary_large_image" present)

  Parsed homepage og:title / og:description / og:image and twitter:card meta tags

  spec ↗report issue
• ✓llms.txtrecommended4/4

  /llms.txt is valid llmstxt.org shape: H1 "InsForge", 33 markdown link(s)

  Fetched /llms.txt and validated it against the llmstxt.org shape (H1, summary, curated links)

  spec ↗report issue
• ✗llms-full.txtbonusrecommended0/2

  GET /llms-full.txt returned HTTP 404

  fix → Add /llms-full.txt with expanded inline docs content so agents can load everything in one fetch.

  Fetched /llms-full.txt and checked for substantial inline markdown content

  spec ↗report issue
• ✓JSON-LD structured datarequired4/4

  3 JSON-LD block(s) on homepage and pricing page (types: Organization, WebSite, SoftwareApplication); Organization block is well-formed

  Extracted and validated application/ld+json blocks on the homepage and pricing page

  spec ↗report issue
• ✓Markdown content negotiationrecommended3/3

  https://insforge.dev/ returns markdown for `Accept: text/markdown` (content-type text/markdown)

  Requested key pages with Accept: text/markdown and probed .md twin URLs

  report issue

Whether the artifacts an agent needs to build on you — docs, API specs, SDKs, MCP servers — exist and are findable.

• ✓Developer resource discoverabilityrecommended3/3

  Search "InsForge API documentation" cited your own domain: https://docs.insforge.dev/sdks/rest/overview, https://docs.insforge.dev/sdks/rest/ai, https://docs.insforge.dev/sdks/rest/auth, https://docs.insforge.dev/sdks/rest/database, https://docs.insforge.dev/sdks/rest/functions

  Searched for your brand with developer-keyword suffixes and checked which official resources are cited

  report issue
• ✗OpenAPI spec discoverablerequired0/5

  No OpenAPI spec found: checked docs-page links and /openapi.json, /openapi.yaml, /swagger.json, /api/openapi.json, /docs/openapi.json, and api-subdomain locations

  fix → Publish your OpenAPI spec at /openapi.json and link it from docs — it's the single highest-leverage artifact for agent integration.

  Probed standard OpenAPI locations and docs links for a fetchable, parseable spec

  spec ↗report issue
• ✓Docs discoverablerequired4/4

  Docs found at https://docs.insforge.dev/core-concepts/authentication/overview (via homepage link, 4599 chars of readable text)

  Followed homepage nav/footer links and probed /docs, /developers, docs.{domain}

  report issue
• ◐MCP server discoveryrequired2.5/5

  MCP evidence found only as a mention in llms.txt: "https://agents.insforge.dev/mcp.md" — no well-known server card

  fix → Publish /.well-known/mcp/server-card.json describing your MCP endpoint so agents can autodiscover it. Evidence found: llms.txt.

  Probed /.well-known/mcp/server-card.json, mcp.json, and docs mentions for an MCP endpoint

  spec ↗report issue
• ✓npm SDKrecommended2/2

  Official npm package "@insforge/sdk" (verified via repository under the insforge GitHub org (git+https://github.com/InsForge/insforge-sdk-js.git)): latest 1.5.2 published 2026-07-31

  Searched the npm registry for an official, domain-verified SDK package

  report issue
• ✗PyPI SDKrecommended0/2

  No official PyPI SDK found: probed 4 candidate(s) (insforge, insforge-sdk, insforgeapi, insforge-python) — found but not domain-verified: insforge

  fix → Publish an official Python SDK (suggest "insforge") with your domain in the project URLs so agents can verify it's official.

  Searched PyPI for an official, domain-verified SDK package

  report issue

Whether your specs, docs, and tools are complete and descriptive enough for an agent to use them without guessing.

• —OpenAPI validity & qualityrecommendedna

  No OpenAPI spec found — nothing to lint

  Linted the spec: descriptions, operationIds, securitySchemes, servers

  report issue
• ◐Docs qualityrecommended1.8/3

  Docs at https://docs.insforge.dev/core-concepts/authentication/overview scored clarity 4/5, completeness 3/5, runnable examples 2/5, agent-friendliness 3/5 (mean 3.0/5)

  fix → Docs scored 2/5 on runnable examples. The documentation provides a high-level overview of authentication features but lacks concrete, step-by-step examples or code snippets for an agent to directly implement these features.

  An LLM rated your docs for clarity, completeness, runnable examples, and agent-friendliness

  report issue
• ✓Quickstart / getting startedrecommended2/2

  Quickstart found: https://docs.insforge.dev/quickstart (linked from https://docs.insforge.dev/core-concepts/authentication/overview) returns 200 with a code block

  Looked for a quickstart/getting-started guide containing code blocks

  report issue
• —MCP tool qualityrecommendedna

  No tools listed by the MCP endpoint — nothing to lint

  Linted listed tools for descriptions, typed input schemas, and naming

  report issue

Response hygiene, TLS and redirect discipline, and security contact channels agents depend on at runtime.

• ✓TLS & redirect hygienerequired2/2

  http://insforge.dev/ upgrades to https in 1 hop(s), 1 redirect(s) total, final HTTP 200; HSTS present

  Checked http→https redirect behavior, chain length, and TLS health

  report issue
• ✓Response speed & weightrequired1/1

  Homepage TTFB 986ms, payload 234KB, Content-Encoding: br

  Measured homepage TTFB, payload size, and compression

  report issue
• ✓security.txtrecommended1/1

  Valid security.txt at https://insforge.dev/.well-known/security.txt: Contact mailto:security@insforge.dev, Expires 2027-04-16

  Fetched /.well-known/security.txt and validated Contact + Expires

  spec ↗report issue

Whether agents can discover your auth model machine-readably (OAuth metadata) and follow documented steps to credentials.

• ✗OAuth authorization server metadatarecommended0/3

  Neither /.well-known/oauth-authorization-server nor /.well-known/openid-configuration resolved (HTTP 404 / HTTP 404)

  fix → Serve RFC 8414 metadata at /.well-known/oauth-authorization-server with PKCE (S256) and a registration_endpoint so agents can self-onboard.

  Fetched /.well-known/oauth-authorization-server (and openid-configuration fallback)

  spec ↗report issue
• ✗OAuth protected resource metadatarecommended0/2

  No RFC 9728 metadata: https://insforge.dev/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource → HTTP 404

  fix → Serve RFC 9728 metadata at /.well-known/oauth-protected-resource naming your authorization servers so agents can discover how to authenticate.

  Fetched /.well-known/oauth-protected-resource

  spec ↗report issue
• ✓Auth documentationrecommended2/2

  Auth documentation found at https://insforge.dev/auth.md (5654 chars, with code examples)

  Looked for /auth.md or an authentication docs page with code examples

  report issue

Whether pricing is discoverable and machine-readable, and whether you support agent payment protocols.

• ✓Pricing discoverablerequired5/5

  Pricing page found at https://insforge.dev/pricing (via homepage link) with legible price signals ("$0 / month For prototypes, dem").

  Followed nav/footer links and probed /pricing for a page with legible price signals

  report issue
• ✓Machine-readable pricingrecommended5/5

  LLM extracted 12 numerically-priced plan(s) from https://insforge.dev/pricing at confidence 1.00: Free $ 0/month; Pro $ 20/month; Enterprise (contact sales); NANONano $ 5/month; MICROMicro $ 10/month; SMALLSmall $ 20/month; MEDIUMMedium $ 40/month; LARGELarge $ 80/month; XLXLarge $ 160/month; 2XL2XLarge $ 320/month; 4XL4XLarge $ 640/month; 8XL8XLarge $ 1280/month; 16XL16XLarge $ 2560/month; 16XL+Larger (contact sales).

  Looked for Offer JSON-LD, then had an LLM attempt structured extraction of your plans

  spec ↗report issue
• ✗x402 payment supportbonusrecommended0/2

  /.well-known/x402 returned HTTP 404. No x402 support detected (bonus check — absence costs nothing).

  fix → Support x402: serve payment requirements at /.well-known/x402, or answer unauthenticated API calls with HTTP 402 plus an x402 payment-requirements payload (x402Version, accepts[]).

  Probed /.well-known/x402 and API endpoints for HTTP 402 payment-required envelopes

  spec ↗report issue
• ✗AP2 readinessemerging0/1

  No AP2 hints found — scanned llms.txt, agents.md, docs page (https://docs.insforge.dev/core-concepts/authentication/overview); /.well-known/ap2 returned HTTP 404.

  fix → Adopt AP2 to accept delegated agent payments — see https://ap2-protocol.org.

  Scanned fetched artifacts and well-known paths for AP2 hints

  spec ↗report issue
• ✗Agentic Commerce Protocolemerging0/1

  No Agentic Commerce Protocol hints found — scanned llms.txt, agents.md, docs page (https://docs.insforge.dev/core-concepts/authentication/overview); /.well-known/acp returned HTTP 404.

  fix → Adopt the Agentic Commerce Protocol so agent checkouts can complete against your store — see https://developers.openai.com/commerce.

  Scanned docs and specs for agentic checkout endpoints

  spec ↗report issue
• ✗Other agent payment protocolsbonusemerging0/1

  No UCP/MPP hints found — scanned llms.txt, agents.md, docs page (https://docs.insforge.dev/core-concepts/authentication/overview).

  fix → Track emerging agent payment protocols (UCP, MPP) and adopt the ones your buyers' agents use.

  Scanned fetched artifacts for UCP/MPP protocol hints

  report issue

Whether an end user's agent can operate on their behalf: working MCP tools, published skills, agent configs.

• —Agent skill publishedbonusemergingna

  Requires the analysis phase — not yet evaluated

  Checked /skill.md, /.well-known/skills/, and skills.sh for published agent skills

  report issue
• ✗MCP handshake & tools listrequired0/4

  MCP endpoint https://agents.insforge.dev/mcp.md failed handshake: Not a JSON-RPC endpoint

  fix → MCP endpoint https://agents.insforge.dev/mcp.md failed handshake: Not a JSON-RPC endpoint. Support streamable HTTP with protocol version negotiation; if auth-gated, return RFC 9728 metadata in WWW-Authenticate.

  Performed a streamable-HTTP initialize + tools/list against the MCP endpoint

  spec ↗report issue
• —Agent configs in public repobonusemergingna

  Requires the analysis phase — not yet evaluated

  Checked your public GitHub org's main repos for AGENTS.md / .claude / .cursor configs

  report issue

Whether the site itself is legible to non-rendering and browser agents: semantic HTML, no JS walls, accessibility.

• ✗NLWeb endpointemerging0/1

  No NLWeb endpoint detected: /.well-known/nlweb.json returned HTTP 404 (text/html); GET /ask?query=hello returned HTTP 404 (text/html)

  fix → Consider exposing an NLWeb /ask endpoint (and /.well-known/nlweb.json) for conversational access to your content.

  Probed /.well-known/nlweb.json and the /ask endpoint

  spec ↗report issue
• ✓Semantic HTML structurerequired3/3

  5/6 semantic signals present on the homepage (missing: text-to-markup ratio ≥ 0.10)

  Scored landmark elements, heading hierarchy, and text-to-markup ratio on the homepage

  report issue
• ✓Content readable without JavaScriptrequired2/2

  Homepage raw HTML contains 6029 chars of visible text without JavaScript

  Measured visible text in the raw, unrendered homepage HTML

  report issue
• ✓Accessibility basicsrequired2/2

  Homepage accessibility: 5/5 checks passed

  Static checks: lang attribute, title, alt coverage, labeled inputs, landmarks

  report issue
• ✗WebMCPemerging0/1

  No WebMCP evidence on homepage: no application/webmcp script and no navigator.modelContext reference

  fix → Consider WebMCP to expose page actions as tools to browser agents.

  Looked for WebMCP script declarations on the homepage

  spec ↗report issue