Kuroma Kuroma

hstnet.com.tw scores 34/100 for AI Readiness

hstnet.com.tw scores 34/100 (grade F) on AI Readiness, audited 10 Aug 2026. Its strongest area is Technical Optimization (49) and its weakest is Authority Signals (22); the biggest single gap is Question Coverage & FAQ Presence at 0/100 (No FAQ schema markup detected).

Audited URL: https://hstnet.com.tw/

34/100
Grade
F

This audit is 37 days old. AI answers change between audits, so what AI search sees today may differ from this card.

Updated 37 days ago

Is hstnet.com.tw ready for AI search?

Not yet: hstnet.com.tw scores 34/100 (grade F). Start with Add FAQ Schema Markup and Expand Content Depth & Comprehensiveness.

Category scores

This audit was scored on rubric version 2026-08-10, not the current 2026-08-13 rubric. Scores are only comparable within one rubric generation, so how much each check counts toward the total is left out. The checks on this page, their verdicts and their scores are exactly what that audit measured. A fresh audit of this site is scored on the current rubric.

On-Page Content 39
Technical Optimization 49
Authority Signals 22
AI Readiness 29

All 19 scored checks

Every check the published rubric scores, with what this audit found on the page.

On-Page Content

  • Content Depth & Comprehensiveness Partial 54/100

    Found: 332 words, 24 paragraphs, 6 lists, 6 images (0 with alt text)

    • Content length (332 words) is below recommended minimum of 1,000 words
    • 6 images missing alt text (e.g. /images/logo_head.svg, /images/logo_head.svg, /images/word.svg)
  • Question Coverage & FAQ Presence Fail 0/100

    No FAQ structure. 0 question headings. 0 questions detected in content

    • No FAQ schema markup detected
    • Few question-based headings
  • Structured Data Quality Needs work 30/100

    No JSON-LD structured data found

  • AI Readability Score Partial 70/100

    Average 12 words/sentence. 1 long sentences. No text formatting.

  • Heading Hierarchy Pass 97/100

    H1: 1, H2: 4, H3: 2. Proper hierarchy.

  • Media Accessibility Fail 14/100

    Measures whether images, video, and charts have text equivalents AI can read.

    • 6 of 6 content images have no alt text, so their content is invisible to AI search.
    • 2 images have no caption, so AI can't read the takeaway of a chart or diagram without one.

Technical Optimization

Authority Signals

  • E-E-A-T Signals Fail 5/100

    Experience: 0/10. Expertise: 0/25. Authority: 0/10. Trust: 4/25

    • No author attribution found
    • No publication or update dates found
  • External Citations & References Fail 15/100

    2 external links, 0 citation phrases, 0 statistics. No references section.

    • Few external citations to authoritative sources
  • Trust & Brand Signals Needs work 43/100

    Present: SSL, Privacy Policy, Contact, Social Links

AI Readiness

  • Answer Box Potential Fail 20/100

    0 definitions, 0 ordered lists, 0 comparison structures

    • No FAQ structure detected
  • Citation-Worthiness Fail 0/100

    0 original data indicators, 0 percentages, 0 quotes.

    • Limited use of specific statistics
  • Content Freshness Needs work 30/100

    References current year

    • No machine-readable date on the page, so AI cannot tell when it was written
  • Unique Value Proposition Needs work 45/100

    4 of 16 passages carry a figure, 0 set two figures against each other, 0 named versions or models.

  • AI Discoverability Not measured 63/100

    Score: 63/100

  • Raw HTML Availability Pass 100/100

    332 words readable without JavaScript

This audit measures citation readiness: how easily AI engines can crawl, extract, and quote these pages. It cannot see the off-site brand footprint (mentions, reviews, third-party coverage) that gates whether AI engines retrieve a brand at all; Kuroma's visibility scans and off-site signals track that side. How the score works

Score your own site →