
CrazySEO
io.github.bolideePublished by GitHub account bolideev0.1.2Updated Oct 27, 2026
Audit whether ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity recommend a site. Readiness checks need no keys.
Overview
CrazySEO audits whether ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity recommend a site, and checks how ready a site is for AI search.
- What you can do
- Run an 11-point AI-readiness audit of a site (HTTPS, robots.txt AI crawlers, schema.org, meta, alt text, sitemap, broken links)
- Plan a keyless visibility audit: fetch site facts and generate the buyer questions to ask
- Score answers the assistant itself collected into visibility, a competitor leaderboard and a citation gap
- Query configured engines blind for multi-engine visibility with verbatim prompts and raw answers
- List the sources cited on questions the site lost
- Report which engines the current install can query
- When to use it
- Useful for SEO, GEO/AEO or marketing work where you want to know whether AI assistants name a brand when buyers ask for recommendations, and which sources get cited instead. The readiness audit runs without keys, so it is also a quick pre-deploy check of a site's AI crawlability.
- Requirements
- Runs locally over stdio, typically via npx crazyseo mcp, so Node.js is needed. The readiness check and the keyless plan/score tools need no credentials. Cross-engine visibility needs at least one of OPENAI_API_KEY, GOOGLE_API_KEY or PERPLEXITY_API_KEY; each is optional and more keys mean more engines. Network access to the audited site and to the model providers.
Installation
In SourceWeft
- Open CrazySEO in the dashboard and add it to a workspace.
- Enable the server for the chats that should use its tools.
Desktop only via STDIO. STDIO servers start a local process, so they need the SourceWeft desktop host.
Other MCP clients
Follow the launch instructions in the repository.
README
CrazySEO
Find out whether ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity recommend your site — and why they don't.
An open-source GEO / AEO auditor and MCP server. No account. No card. Your keys.
[crazyseo readiness audit of stripe.com, scoring 82 out of 100 across 11 technical checks]
Your customers have stopped googling. They ask an assistant "best CRM for small law firms?" and buy whatever it names. If it doesn't name you, you don't exist — and no analytics tool will tell you, because there is no click to measure.
This audits it directly: it asks the questions your buyers ask, records the answers word for word, and shows you which sources the models cite instead of you.
Why another one
Most tools in this space ask the model "what do you think of Acme?" — which tells you nothing, because naming the brand in the prompt guarantees it shows up in the answer.
This asks blind. Your brand never appears in the question, so the answer you get back is the answer a real buyer gets. That is the whole difference between a number you can act on and a number that flatters you.
Three more things a prompt wrapper can't do:
- Verbatim receipts. Every result carries the exact prompt and the model's raw answer, so you can paste it into ChatGPT yourself and reproduce it.
- Honest coverage. If an engine fails or rate-limits, the report says so. It never quietly drops an engine and calls the remaining average your score. If a site can't be reached, it refuses to score it rather than inventing a number.
- A real readiness audit. 11 checks against your actual site — not a prompt.
Quick start — no API keys needed
The readiness audit runs against any site with zero configuration and zero cost:
Nothing to install, no signup, no key. Or run it from source:
(That's real output — stripe.com, unmodified.)
11 scored checks, all first-party fetches: HTTPS · AI crawlers (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, Google-Extended…) unblocked in robots.txt · schema.org markup · title + meta · readable without JavaScript · canonical · Open Graph · single-H1 structure · image alt-text coverage · sitemap referenced · broken internal links (sampled).
Plus llms.txt, shown but deliberately unscored: Google's own AI-optimization guidance says it has no effect in Google Search, so it can't fairly cost anyone points — but some agents do read it, so it's still worth seeing.
Exits non-zero when checks fail, so you can gate a deploy on it:
Machine-readable output for pipelines:
The visibility audit — bring your own keys
To measure what the engines actually say, add whichever keys you have. Any one is enough; more engines means more coverage.
It reads your site, infers what you sell, generates the questions your buyers would actually ask, and asks all of them — blind — across every engine you configured.
(Real output, trimmed for length. Note the last line: when an engine fails, the report says so instead of quietly averaging the rest and calling it your score.)
Runs on your own keys — a full audit is typically a few cents.
Use it from your agent
It ships as an MCP server, so Claude, ChatGPT or any MCP-capable agent can run it directly:
It's also packaged as a Claude Code plugin, which wires up the MCP server and the skill below in one step:
Then just ask:
"Is my site visible in AI search? What's cited instead of me?"
You don't need an API key to get the interesting part. audit_plan and
audit_score let the assistant you're already talking to be the engine: it
fetches your site, writes the buyer questions, answers them with its own web
search, and hands the results back for scoring. Ask "is my site visible in AI
search?" and you get a real citation gap with no signup, no key, no billing.
The tool still does the arithmetic, and still refuses a question that names your
brand — that guard is what makes the number worth having. It measures visibility
in that assistant, which the report says plainly. For the cross-engine
picture, use audit with your own keys.
There's also a SKILL.md so agents know how to interpret the
numbers — that readiness isn't visibility, that 0% is a normal starting point,
and that partial engine coverage must be reported as partial.
Use it as a library
How this stays free
Everything here is free forever, self-hosted, AGPL — full capability, no feature locks, no telemetry, no account, no upsell in the output.
There is no paid tier today, and this README won't pretend otherwise. If one ever appears it will be for the single thing self-hosting genuinely can't give you — scheduled re-runs, stored history and alerts, the infrastructure to watch a number move over months without running anything yourself. The auditing itself stays here, complete, under AGPL.
Which is also the answer to "what stops this going closed later": the licence. Anyone offering it as a hosted service has to open their version too, including whoever wrote it.
Contributing
Issues and PRs welcome. The checks are deliberately conservative: every one has to be something an assistant or its crawler actually depends on, and verifiable by hand. If a check can't be justified that way, it doesn't belong here.
CONTRIBUTING.md covers the setup, the bar a new check has to clear, and what an engine adapter needs to get right.
License
AGPL-3.0. Use it, fork it, run it commercially, embed it in your own tooling. If you offer it to others as a hosted service, that service must be open too.
Source: README.md at commit 5e31309
Tools
0Version history
1- v0.1.2LatestSep 16, 2026
Score
50% of the applicable checks met
How complete this listing is, computed from the registry entry, the endpoint and public sources. Not a rating of the server and not a statement that it is safe or working today: reachability is a dated check, and no installs or reviews go into the score.
- Reached in the last 30 days25 pts
Keep the endpoint answering the MCP handshake; SourceWeft probes it every 30 days.
- Auth declared10 pts
Declare the credential headers in the registry entry, or keep the endpoint answering the probe so its auth can be classified.
- Tools listed15 pts
Answer tools/list without a credential, or ship a package that starts in a sandbox without one.
- DescriptionRequired15 pts
- Logo10 pts
- Documentation15 pts
- License10 pts

