You publish files for machines to read, but nothing that tells one how to become a customer.

None of the nine known agent entry paths answered, including /agent-signup.md and /.well-known/agent-access.json. Reading is solved on your site; joining is not.

of the 13 points that apply to you and we could measure · 4 of 17 were not scored

You 6 · category median 9 · best algolia.com 10 · 15 deterministic HTTP checks, published formula

Fix this first

This is the whole list: everything we could measure and you do not pass. Another 4 points sit behind checks we could not evaluate on your domain, and each of those lines below says what would make it measurable.

1. 1
   llms.txt publishedminutes · +1

   Your llms.txt is already there. 1 of the 11 links we sampled are gone, starting with https://github.com/oramasearch/orama-cloud-cli#readme. Fix those and this passes: a map an agent follows into a 404 costs it the budget it came with.

2. 2
   Agent entry pointan afternoon · +2

   Publish /agent-signup.md: the path from nothing to a working key, written as steps for a machine rather than a tour for a person. Ours is at /agent-signup.md if you want a worked example, and it says plainly that we have nothing to sign up for.

3. 3
   Programmatic key provisioningan afternoon · +2

   Document how a key is created without opening a dashboard: management API, service account or CLI. If no such path exists, that gap is the finding, not the docs.

None of this tells you whether an agent picked you

Everything above is a file an agent could read. Whether one actually chose you is a different measurement, and we have not run it on oramasearch.com. What we have run it on is a rich text editor vendor: six agents, one brief, six isolated copies of a real codebase. All six picked the same competitor, and the vendor being studied was never named, not even on a rejection list, while the runs named and dismissed ten alternatives between them. In an earlier round, run before we isolated the copies, it was named twice and struck off both times in four words: Fully commercial, licence key required. That study is about them, not about you. It is here because it is the difference between a file and a decision.

Against search as a service

You are 5 of 6 in a category where a developer is trying to put a search box over your own data.

1. 1
   algolia.com
   10/14
2. 2
   elastic.co
   10/14
3. 3
   meilisearch.com
   9/15
4. 4
   typesense.org
   9/16
5. 5
   oramasearch.comyou
   6/13
6. 6
   searchkit.co
   5/13

Only domains we have actually scanned appear here, so the ranking is a floor: a competitor missing from the list has not been measured, not beaten.

By stage

Every check

Each line is one HTTP observation with a published rule, so you can rerun any of them yourself. Most are the same tomorrow if you are: the two that are not are the bot gate and the pricing page, which answer inconsistently on their own, which is why those run more than once and say so when the tries disagreed. PASS and PART are counted. UNMEASURED means we could not evaluate it, N/A means it does not apply to a product like yours, and neither is in the score or its denominator. See the formula

What we discovered on the way

Docs

not found

Pricing

https://orama.com/pricing · linked from the site

Signup

not found

npm package

@orama/orama (registry guess)

GitHub

oramasearch/orama

Package licence

Apache-2.0

Crawl-delay

none

Content-Signal

search=yes,ai-train=no,use=reference

Blocked on-demand agents

none