Kuroma Kuroma

jfrog.com scores 63/100 for AI Readiness

Software Supply Chain Solutions for DevOps & Security (jfrog.com) is a Developer Tools / Platforms site; Kuroma measured its AI Readiness at 63/100 (grade A), audited 20 Aug 2026. Its strongest area is Technical Optimization (87) and its weakest is AI Readiness (52); the biggest single gap is Structured Data Quality at 0/100 (No extractable data structures in the page's own content — the 9 lists and tables this check found all sit in the navigation, header, footer or sidebar). That places it in the top quartile of the 175 Developer Tools / Platforms sites Kuroma has audited.

Audited URL: https://jfrog.com

63/100
Grade
A

Great job! Your page is well-optimized with minor improvements possible.

Updated today

Top 25% in Developer Tools / Platforms Median 46 · Top quartile 52 · across 175 audited sites in Developer Tools / Platforms

Is jfrog.com ready for AI search?

Largely yes: jfrog.com scores 63/100 (grade A). The remaining fixes are Make This Page’s Facts Extractable and Add FAQ Schema Markup.

Category scores

On-Page Content 25% of the score 53
Technical Optimization 20% of the score 87
Authority Signals 25% of the score 68
AI Readiness 30% of the score 52

Top fixes, ranked by points recovered

Ranked by each check's share of the overall score times how far it fell short, so the biggest number is the biggest win, not the lowest score.

  1. Increase Citation-Worthy Content up to +5.1 pts

    On https://jfrog.com · AI Readiness → Citation-Worthiness, scored 32/100

    • Limited use of specific statistics
    • Conduct original research or surveys
    • Include specific statistics with sources
    • Add expert quotes and interviews
  2. Improve Unique Value Proposition up to +4.6 pts

    On https://jfrog.com · AI Readiness → Unique Value Proposition, scored 10/100

    • Most passages describe the offer in general terms; carry the figures into them rather than leaving them in one panel
    • Set a figure against something in the same sentence: a before and after, your price against the list price, your number against the alternative
    • Widen the evidence: prices, percentages, measured magnitudes and volumes each answer a different question about the same claim
  3. Make This Page’s Facts Extractable up to +4.5 pts

    On https://jfrog.com · On-Page Content → Structured Data Quality, scored 0/100

    • No extractable data structures in the page's own content — the 9 lists and tables this check found all sit in the navigation, header, footer or sidebar
    • Present comparable facts as a table with a header row, so an engine can quote a specific value
    • Every list of three or more items on this page sits in the navigation, header, footer or sidebar — put the page's own enumerable points into a list of three or more items
  4. Add FAQ Schema Markup up to +4 pts

    On https://jfrog.com · On-Page Content → Question Coverage & FAQ Presence, scored 39/100

    • No FAQ schema markup detected
    • Few question-based headings
    • Identify the top 5-10 questions your audience asks
    • Create a dedicated FAQ section on this page
    • Add FAQPage schema markup (see code below)
  5. Strengthen E-E-A-T Signals up to +3.9 pts

    On https://jfrog.com · Authority Signals → E-E-A-T Signals, scored 44/100

    • No author attribution found
    • No publication or update dates found
    • Add author byline with name and credentials
    • Create detailed author bio pages
    • Include "About Us" with company history

All 19 scored checks

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

On-Page Content 25% of the score

  • Content Depth & Comprehensiveness Pass 90/100

    6.5% of the overall score

    Found: 2010 words, 25 paragraphs, 11 lists, 138 images (28 with alt text)

    • 110 images missing alt text
  • Question Coverage & FAQ Presence Needs work 39/100

    6.5% of the overall score

    No FAQ structure. 1 question headings. 2 questions detected in content

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

    4.5% of the overall score

    2 JSON-LD scripts. Schema types: WebPage, BreadcrumbList, WebSite, Organization

    • No extractable data structures in the page's own content — the 9 lists and tables this check found all sit in the navigation, header, footer or sidebar
  • AI Readability Score Partial 70/100

    3% of the overall score

    Average 10 words/sentence. 1 long sentences. No text formatting.

  • Heading Hierarchy Pass 89/100

    2.8% of the overall score

    H1: 1, H2: 9, H3: 15. Hierarchy issues.

  • Media Accessibility Fail 24/100

    1.8% of the overall score

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

    • 93 of 120 content images have no alt text, so their content is invisible to AI search.
    • 25 images have alt text too short to describe what they show ("banner background", "cube", "cube").
    • 55 images have no caption, so AI can't read the takeaway of a chart or diagram without one.
    • This page has 120 images but only ~2010 words, so your key information may be trapped in images that AI search can't read.

Technical Optimization 20% of the score

  • Schema Markup Completeness Pass 100/100

    1% of the overall score

    2 valid schemas, has Organization, has OpenGraph

  • Page Performance Indicators Partial 68/100

    2% of the overall score

    11 render-blocking resources. 1651 elements for 2010 words

    • 11 render-blocking scripts and stylesheets load before this page can appear
  • Mobile Optimization Partial 70/100

    4% of the overall score

    Has viewport. 7 responsive images

  • Crawlability & Accessibility Pass 94/100

    13% of the overall score

    HTTPS enabled. Has canonical. Indexable. All scored AI crawlers allowed. 6 placeholder links

    • 6 of 253 links cannot be followed by a crawler

Authority Signals 25% of the score

  • E-E-A-T Signals Needs work 44/100

    7% of the overall score

    Experience: 4/10. Expertise: 10/25. Authority: 16/25. Trust: 7/25

    • No author attribution found
    • No publication or update dates found
  • External Citations & References Pass 75/100

    9% of the overall score

    9 external links, 1 citation phrases, 3 statistics. Has references section.

  • Trust & Brand Signals Pass 79/100

    9% of the overall score

    Present: About page, Publisher schema (5 identity properties), Privacy Policy, Legal notice, Contact, Social profiles (5)

AI Readiness 30% of the score

  • Answer Box Potential Partial 50/100

    7.2% of the overall score

    7 of 25 headings open a quotable passage, 0 definitions, 0 comparison structures

    • No FAQ structure detected
  • Citation-Worthiness Needs work 32/100

    7.5% of the overall score

    1 original data indicators, 3 percentages, 0 quotes.

    • Limited use of specific statistics
  • Content Freshness Pass 95/100

    5.7% of the overall score

    References current year. Last modified: 8/5/2026

  • Unique Value Proposition Fail 10/100

    5.1% of the overall score

    2 of 147 passages carry a figure, 0 set two figures against each other, 0 named versions or models.

  • AI Discoverability Not measured 75/100

    3% of the overall score

    Score: 75/100

  • Raw HTML Availability Pass 100/100

    1.5% of the overall score

    2010 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 card

How Kuroma scores AI Readiness · Every published AI Readiness score card · AI Readiness benchmark for Developer Tools / Platforms · Run a free AI Readiness audit

Run this site? Claim this card · Ask us to remove this card

AI Readiness across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity & Google AI · kuroma.ai