Kuroma
instag.ai scores 40/100 for AI Readiness
instag.ai is a Technology site; Kuroma measured its AI Readiness at 40/100 (grade D), audited 10 Aug 2026. Its strongest area is Technical Optimization (76) and its weakest is AI Readiness (17); the biggest single gap is Citation-Worthiness at 0/100 (Limited use of specific statistics).
Audited URL: https://instag.ai
This audit is 37 days old. AI answers change between audits, so what AI search sees today may differ from this card.
Is instag.ai ready for AI search?
Not yet: instag.ai scores 40/100 (grade D). 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.
All 19 scored checks
Every check the published rubric scores, with what this audit found on the page.
On-Page Content
-
Found: 423 words, 20 paragraphs, 12 lists, 65 images (65 with alt text)
- Content length (423 words) is below recommended minimum of 1,000 words
-
No FAQ structure. 1 question headings. 0 questions detected in content
- No FAQ schema markup detected
- Few question-based headings
-
1 JSON-LD scripts. Schema types: Organization, WebSite
-
Average 11 words/sentence. 1 long sentences. No text formatting.
-
H1: 1, H2: 5, H3: 8. Proper hierarchy.
-
Measures whether images, video, and charts have text equivalents AI can read.
- 52 images have alt text too short to describe what they show ("遠見雜誌", "天下文化", "ESG遠見").
- 56 images have no caption, so AI can't read the takeaway of a chart or diagram without one.
- This page has 65 images but only ~423 words, so your key information may be trapped in images that AI search can't read.
- 2 video(s) have no transcript or captions, so AI search treats them as a blank space.
Technical Optimization
-
1 valid schemas, has Organization, has OpenGraph
-
2 render-blocking resources. 490 elements for 423 words
-
Has viewport
-
HTTPS enabled. Has canonical. Indexable. All scored AI crawlers allowed
Authority Signals
-
Experience: 7/10. Expertise: 0/25. Authority: 4/10. Trust: 10/25
- No author attribution found
- No publication or update dates found
-
9 external links, 0 citation phrases, 0 statistics. No references section.
-
Present: SSL
- No privacy policy link found
- No contact information easily accessible
AI Readiness
-
0 definitions, 0 ordered lists, 0 comparison structures
- No FAQ structure detected
-
0 original data indicators, 0 percentages, 0 quotes.
- Limited use of specific statistics
-
No recent year references
- No recent year references in content
- No machine-readable date on the page, so AI cannot tell when it was written
-
0 of 34 passages carry a figure, 0 set two figures against each other, 1 named versions or models.
- No passage on the page carries a figure a reader could check
-
Score: 63/100
-
423 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 → Claim this cardOther audited Technology sites
- Software Development Company (pharosproduction.com) · 88/100
- Neo Genesis (NeoGenesis) (neogenesis.app) · 75/100
- GetWidget (getwidget.dev) · 74/100
- PURIST (purist.online) · 74/100
- Hire Flutter Developers (hireflutterdev.com) · 72/100
- Hire Senior Python & AI Engineers (uvik.net) · 72/100
Other Technology 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.