LLMaoLLMao

    AI search visibility report · 2026-10-17

    How AI assistants see mural.co

    mural.co has an AI visibility score of 54/100. The site passed 15 of 34 tests. Its strongest areas are Technical Accessibility and Schema.org Markup. The areas to improve are Content Freshness and Citation & Source Quality.

    How ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity read mural.co

    Readability60/100

    Result: average. 2 of 4 tests passed.

    Low Flesch Reading Ease score indicates high complexity. Sentence length is acceptable.

    Schema.org Markup74/100

    Result: average. 4 of 5 tests passed.

    Core schemas are excellent, but content-specific schemas (Article, FAQ) are missing.

    Authority & Trust Signals35/100

    Result: weak. 0 of 5 tests passed.

    Lacks specific author credentials and physical contact details. Trust pages are limited to terms.

    Citation & Source Quality24/100

    Result: weak. 0 of 4 tests passed.

    No authoritative outbound links or inline citations for factual claims.

    Content Freshness0/100

    Result: weak. 0 of 4 tests passed.

    No dates found in text or schema. LLMs cannot determine content recency.

    Content Structure64/100

    Result: average. 2 of 4 tests passed.

    Multiple H1 tags present. Good use of semantic sections but hierarchy is flawed.

    Entity Definition70/100

    Result: average. 3 of 4 tests passed.

    Strong About page link and Organization schema, but lacks Person schema for authors.

    Technical Accessibility95/100

    Result: strong. 4 of 4 tests passed.

    Excellent AI crawler access and JS independence. Meta tags are well-implemented.

    How mural.co can improve its AI visibility

    • Implement Visible Content Dates (high priority)
    • Enhance Entity and Author Authority (high priority)
    • Add Authoritative Outbound Citations (medium priority)
    • Fix Heading Hierarchy (medium priority)
    • Complete Contact Information Details (medium priority)

    How mural.co compares to its competitors