Technology · September 2026
Is WP Google Map Plugin ready for AI agents?
WP Google Map Plugin has published figures this month, but not enough pages to publish an index.
Measured, and not part of the index
These are signals, not scores. They are kept apart on purpose: mixed in with the dimensions, a low one reads as a bad grade for something the index never counted.
Sites with an AI crawler policy
- Sample
- n=104
- Coverage
- 100.0%
Not a Lighthouse audit: it is read from the robots.txt of the sampled sites, checking whether the file names any of the AI crawlers we track. It measures HAVING AN EXPLICIT POLICY and not permitting: blocking AI crawlers is a legitimate decision, and penalising it would be a value judgement dressed up as a measurement. What is a sign of maturity is having decided.
Sites serving an llms.txt
- Sample
- n=104
- Coverage
- 100.0%
The same llms-txt audit as the figure below, read differently: this one counts SOMETHING being served at /llms.txt, valid or not. Read that literally, because the distance between the two figures is large and it is the interesting part: of the pages that serve something, fewer than two in five serve a file that parses. Our reading — and we cannot verify it without fetching those files ourselves, which we do not do — is that a good share of the rest are soft 404s: a server answering 200 with an HTML error page. So the figure to cite is the valid one below, and this one is best read as an upper bound. Pages whose audit errored are excluded from both, and the coverage says how many that was.
What else we measure here
Sites with an AI crawler policy
- Sample
- n=104
- Coverage
- 100.0%
Agents that can reach the site
- Sample
- n=104
- Coverage
- 100.0%
Sites serving an llms.txt
- Sample
- n=104
- Coverage
- 100.0%
Sites with a valid llms.txt
- Sample
- n=104
- Coverage
- 100.0%