# llms.txt is dead as a ranking/citation lever

**Confidence: [H]** on non-adoption (multiple independent confirmations)

No major AI platform reads llms.txt as a first-class retrieval input. The
record: Google's official guide says it's not needed (John Mueller: "purely
speculative"); SE Ranking's 300k-domain study found **zero correlation**
with AI citations (removing the feature _improved_ their model's accuracy);
one analysis found 408 of 500M AI-bot visits touched the file; OpenAI makes
no commitment to read it. Site adoption plateaued at ~5-15%.

**How to apply:** never recommend llms.txt for ranking/citation purposes.
It remains harmless and mildly useful for _agent workflows_ (IDE agents,
docs-for-LLMs navigation) — that's the only honest pitch. Time freed goes to
levers with evidence: [[geo-content-levers]], [[mentions-beat-backlinks]].

**Evidence:** https://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-says-llms-txt-is-purely-speculative-for-now/577576/ ·
https://theseocommunity.com/resources/blog/llms-txt-should-we-or-not ·
https://developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/ai-optimization-guide
