Glotier tells you whether ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity name your product when buyers ask what to use in your category. It puts your buyers' real questions to all three as live web queries, records whether you were named and by which of them, which competitors were named instead, and which pages each answer was built from.

How does Glotier check AI visibility?

It runs one live web search per question. ChatGPT and Gemini read the identical results, and Perplexity runs its own retrieval because it does not accept results handed to it. Whether your product is named is decided by a literal presence check on the answer text rather than by asking a model for its opinion, so the number cannot be inflated by a model being agreeable. You can also connect your own ChatGPT or Claude key and have the questions run through your account instead.

Why ask three assistants instead of one?

Because they disagree. In our own study of 40 buying questions, all three named the same product only 30% of the time, and 47% of products were named by exactly one assistant. Checking a single assistant shows you roughly 60% of what is being said about your category, so a founder who checks ChatGPT, sees their name and relaxes has measured one engine on one phrasing.

Is Glotier free to use?

The check is free with no signup. Paid plans start at $39/month (Solo), $99 (Studio) and $249 (Agency), and cover weekly tracking and the content the agent writes.

Does Glotier make up data about my product?

No. Every result comes from observed data: the live search results, the answers the assistants actually returned, and the sources they cited. It does not invent metrics, ratings or engine claims, and when a measurement has not run it says so rather than printing a zero.

Anyone selling something buyers research before choosing, where the category has enough alternatives that an assistant has to pick a shortlist: software, tools, e-commerce, and services. Founders, marketers and agencies all use it, and the work is the same at any size. It is not useful for local or in-person businesses, where maps and reviews decide the outcome instead.

Should I add llms.txt to my site anyway?

Yes, if it takes you twenty minutes. It is cheap, it cannot hurt, and if support arrives you are already there. No, if you are treating it as the thing that will get you named, because that is the expensive version of the mistake: hours on a file nobody has confirmed reading, instead of on the pages that demonstrably decide answers.

Why do so many SEO tools flag a missing llms.txt?

Because it is trivially checkable. An audit tool can test for a file in one request, so it becomes a line item, and a line item in a report reads as a finding. Ease of measurement is not the same as importance, and this is one of the clearest cases of the two being confused.

What is the difference between llms.txt and robots.txt?

robots.txt is an implemented standard that crawlers genuinely obey and it controls access. llms.txt is a proposal for a curated, model-friendly summary of your site's content. One is enforced by decades of practice, the other is a good idea waiting for anyone to adopt it.

So what does move the number?

Being in the pages that get retrieved. In the 3 categories we measured end to end, the 18 answers were built from 131 cited sources, and the domains deciding each category were third-party pages rather than vendor sites. No file on your own domain changes which of those pages exists or what it says about you.

Guide

Does llms.txt actually work?

We publish one. It has not moved our number. Here is the honest state of it, including why every checklist still puts it first.

What it is, and what it is not

llms.txt is a proposed convention: a plain-text file at the root of your site giving a model a curated summary of what you do and where the good pages are. The idea is sound and the file is easy to write.

It is not a standard. No major assistant has announced that it fetches the file before answering, and there is no public evidence of one doing so. Compare that with robots.txt, which crawlers genuinely obey and have for decades. One is enforced practice, the other is a good idea waiting for adoption.

Why it is on every checklist anyway

Because it is trivially checkable. An audit tool can test for a file in one request, so it becomes a line item, and a line item in a report reads as a finding. Semrush’s site audit flags a missing one on our crawl too.

Ease of measurement is not importance. This is one of the clearest cases of the two being confused, and it is worth naming because the same confusion drives a lot of what gets called GEO advice: the things that are easy to check crowd out the things that decide the answer.

Our own data point, for whatever one site is worth

We publish llms.txt at glotier.com and we keep it current. Across 21 buying questions in our own category, AI names us in 0 of them. The file has not changed that.

That is one small site, and absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It is still more than most pages recommending the file are willing to show you, and if it were doing heavy lifting we would expect to have noticed something.

The version of the advice that is actually right

Write one. It takes twenty minutes, it cannot hurt, and if support arrives you are already there. Keep it accurate, because a stale file describing a product you no longer sell is worse than none.

What matters is what you do next. If llms.txt is item one of twelve on a list and the other eleven are also things on your own domain, the list is wrong. On 26 July 2026 we measured 3 categories, reading all 131 sources behind 18 answers, and the pages deciding each category were third-party. Review directories, for scale, accounted for 1 of them, 0.8%.

Nothing you publish on your own domain changes which of those pages exists or what it says about you. That is the uncomfortable centre of this whole field and it is why the cheap on-site tactics stay so popular: they are the part you control.

Do this automatically

Get Glotier Solo

Twenty minutes on llms.txt is fine. The question worth answering after that is which pages actually decide your category, which is a measurement rather than a checklist item.

The same buyer questions re-asked every day, so you see the moment an answer changes
Every source page behind each answer, which is where the work actually is
An article written from what it measured that day, ready for you to publish
The subreddits and threads worth answering, with a reply drafted for each

Track 3 products and up to 150 buyer questions across ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity. $39/month.

Get Solo, $39/month Compare the plans

Cancel any time. Not for you? Email us within 7 days of a charge and we refund it in full. Refund policy

Not ready to pay? The check is free, with no card and no account. Run it on your own product.

Questions people ask next

Does llms.txt actually work?: There is no public evidence that any major assistant fetches llms.txt before answering, and none of the vendors has announced support. It is a proposed convention rather than an implemented standard. We publish one and our own visibility has not moved because of it, which is one small data point and not proof either way.
Should I add llms.txt to my site anyway?: Yes, if it takes you twenty minutes. It is cheap, it cannot hurt, and if support arrives you are already there. No, if you are treating it as the thing that will get you named, because that is the expensive version of the mistake: hours on a file nobody has confirmed reading, instead of on the pages that demonstrably decide answers.
Why do so many SEO tools flag a missing llms.txt?: Because it is trivially checkable. An audit tool can test for a file in one request, so it becomes a line item, and a line item in a report reads as a finding. Ease of measurement is not the same as importance, and this is one of the clearest cases of the two being confused.
What is the difference between llms.txt and robots.txt?: robots.txt is an implemented standard that crawlers genuinely obey and it controls access. llms.txt is a proposal for a curated, model-friendly summary of your site's content. One is enforced by decades of practice, the other is a good idea waiting for anyone to adopt it.
So what does move the number?: Being in the pages that get retrieved. In the 3 categories we measured end to end, the 18 answers were built from 131 cited sources, and the domains deciding each category were third-party pages rather than vendor sites. No file on your own domain changes which of those pages exists or what it says about you.

Keep reading

Measurements taken 26 July 2026 against ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity. If a major assistant announces support for llms.txt we will update this page and say so plainly.