Kuroma Kuroma

www.metro.taipei scores 39/100 for AI Readiness

臺北大眾捷運股份有限公司 (www.metro.taipei) is a Public Transit Navigation site; Kuroma measured its AI Readiness at 39/100 (grade D), audited 18 Jul 2026. Its strongest area is Technical Optimization (67) and its weakest is AI Readiness (25); the biggest single gap is Structured Data Quality at 0/100 (No JSON-LD structured data found).

Audited URL: https://www.metro.taipei/

39/100
Grade
D

This audit is 61 days old. AI answers change between audits, so what AI search sees today may differ from this card.

Updated 61 days ago

Is www.metro.taipei ready for AI search?

Not yet: www.metro.taipei scores 39/100 (grade D). Start with Add FAQ Schema Markup and Implement Comprehensive Schema Markup.

Category scores

This audit did not record which rubric version scored it, so it is not confirmed as 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 38
Technical Optimization 67
Authority Signals 33
AI Readiness 25

The 16 checks this audit confirms it scored

Every check this audit confirms it scored, with what it found on the page. 3 other checks are listed without a share of the score, because this audit cannot confirm whether they counted on this page.

On-Page Content

  • Content Depth & Comprehensiveness Pass 88/100

    Found: 1701 words, 4 paragraphs, 60 lists, 62 images (50 with alt text)

    • 12 images missing alt text
  • Question Coverage & FAQ Presence Fail 0/100

    Not counted in every language, and this audit did not record the language this page was scored in, so its share of the score is left out

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

    • No FAQ schema markup detected
    • Few question-based headings
  • Structured Data Quality Fail 0/100

    No JSON-LD structured data found

    • No JSON-LD structured data found
  • AI Readability Score Pass 80/100

    Average 10 words/sentence. 4 long sentences. Has text formatting.

  • Heading Hierarchy Needs work 30/100

    H1: 1, H2: 0, H3: 0. Hierarchy issues.

    • Insufficient H2 headings for content sections
  • Media Accessibility Needs work 33/100

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

    • 12 of 62 content images have no alt text, so their content is invisible to AI search.
    • 48 images have generic or filename-only alt text (e.g. "image", "chart", a filename) that tells AI nothing about the content.
    • 62 images have no caption, so AI can't read the takeaway of a chart or diagram without one.
    • This page has 62 images but only ~1701 words, so your key information may be trapped in images that AI search can't read.

Technical Optimization

  • Schema Markup Completeness Needs work 30/100

    0 valid schemas

  • Page Performance Indicators Pass 100/100

    Fetch succeeded with an acceptable response time

  • Mobile Optimization Partial 60/100

    Has viewport

  • Crawlability & Accessibility Partial 67/100

    HTTPS enabled. Missing canonical. Indexable. 21 placeholder links

    • Missing canonical tag
    • Meta robots noarchive/nocache directive detected. Bing documents that NOARCHIVE prevents content from being used in Copilot responses and grounding results.
    • 21 placeholder links detected

Authority Signals

  • E-E-A-T Signals Fail 20/100

    Not counted in every language, and this audit did not record the language this page was scored in, so its share of the score is left out

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

    • No author attribution found
  • External Citations & References Needs work 38/100

    0 external links, 14 citation phrases, 1 statistics. No references section.

    • Few external citations to authoritative sources
  • Trust & Brand Signals Needs work 39/100

    Present: SSL, Social Links

    • No privacy policy link found
    • No contact information easily accessible

AI Readiness

  • Answer Box Potential Fail 20/100

    0 definitions, 0 ordered lists, 0 tables

    • No FAQ structure detected
  • Citation-Worthiness Fail 20/100

    Not counted in every language, and this audit did not record the language this page was scored in, so its share of the score is left out

    0 original data indicators, 0 percentages, 0 quotes.

    • Limited use of specific statistics
  • Content Freshness Partial 55/100

    References current year

    • No article publish/modified dates in metadata
  • Unique Value Proposition Fail 0/100

    0 unique value phrases, 0 differentiators, 0 case study mentions.

    • No case studies or concrete examples found
  • AI Discoverability Not measured 0/100

    Score: 0/100

  • Raw HTML Availability Pass 100/100

    1701 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 →

Other audited Public Transit Navigation sites

Other Public Transit Navigation sites without a public score card

No public score card exists for these sites yet. Pick one to run a free audit on it; nothing runs until you confirm on the next page.