Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add techhorizonlabs/thl-open --skill geo-llmstxtgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/techhorizonlabs/thl-openWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/techhorizonlabs/thl-open/geo-llmstxt)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/techhorizonlabs/thl-open/geo-llmstxt"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/techhorizonlabs/thl-open/geo-llmstxt/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/techhorizonlabs/thl-open/geo-llmstxt"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/techhorizonlabs/thl-open/geo-llmstxt.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00046 | $0.01414 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00566 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00283 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00141 |
Grade A, and why
geo-llmstxt scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 16d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 112 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
llms.txt Standard Analysis and Generation Skill
Purpose
This skill handles everything related to the llms.txt standard, an emerging convention (proposed
by Jeremy Howard in September 2024) that lets a website give AI systems structured guidance about
its content, structure, and key information. It is analogous to robots.txt (which tells crawlers
what NOT to access) but instead tells AI systems what IS most useful to understand about the site.
The full format spec, the llms-full.txt variant, a fill-in template, and best practices live in
references/spec.md: read it before validating or generating a file.
Why llms.txt Matters
AI models must work out which pages matter, what a site is about, and how content is organized,
usually by crawling many pages and inferring structure. llms.txt solves this with an explicit,
machine- and human-readable summary.
- Faster AI comprehension: understand the site's purpose and structure from one file rather than dozens of pages.
- Controlled narrative: you choose which pages and facts AI systems see first, shaping how they represent your brand.
- Higher citation accuracy: AI systems that consult llms.txt cite the correct, authoritative page for each topic.
- Reduced misrepresentation: key facts (pricing, features, locations) are stated explicitly, reducing hallucination.
- Early-adopter advantage: only a small minority of sites have an llms.txt today, so it remains a differentiator.
Analysis Mode
When checking an existing llms.txt file.
Step 1: Fetch the File
- Use WebFetch to retrieve
[domain]/llms.txt. Also check[domain]/llms-full.txt. - Record HTTP status: 200 → validate; 404 → recommend generation; 403 → file blocked, flag as misconfiguration; 301/302 → follow and note the redirect.
Step 2: Validate Format
Check each structural element against the format rules in references/spec.md:
| Element | Check | Severity if Missing |
|---|---|---|
| H1 Title | Present, matches business name | Critical |
| Blockquote description | Present, under 200 chars, factual | High |
| At least one H2 section | Present | Critical |
| Page entries with URLs | At least 5 entries present | High |
| URLs are absolute | All URLs use full https:// paths | High |
| URLs are valid | All URLs return 200 status | Medium |
| Descriptions present | Every entry has a description after the colon | Medium |
| Key Facts section | Present with business information | Medium |
| Contact section | Present with at least email | Low |
| Reasonable length | 30-200 lines | Low |
| No broken Markdown | Proper formatting throughout | Medium |
What ships with it
2 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 16d ago Changed aa509064d12d
- 1mo ago First seen · 112 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A 5db1ebb855a3
geo-llmstxt is a skill published in the GitHub repository techhorizonlabs/thl-open (18 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 1,414 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
seo-content-blog
Spec, audit, competitor benchmark and build for blog articles and the blog template, so a post ranks on Google and gets cited by AI engines (ChatGPT, Perplexity, AI Overviews). Input: a keyword, topic, draft or post URL. Phase 1 spec: BLOG rows on top of the common page spec, covering the 12-element answer-first…
seo-content-collection-page
Spec, audit, competitor benchmark and build for e-commerce collection, category and product listing pages (PLPs) on Shopify, WooCommerce, Magento, BigCommerce, PrestaShop or a custom store. Runs four phases: the collection spec (COL-01 to COL-24 plus the common rows), an audit of the live page with the bundled…
seo-content-product-page
Spec, audit, competitor benchmark and build for e-commerce product pages (PDPs), so they rank in Google and get recommended by the AI assistants that now link products directly. Input: a product page URL or a product brief (Shopify, WooCommerce, Magento, BigCommerce, PrestaShop, Wix, Webflow or custom). Runs four…
seo-content-service-page
Spec, audit, competitor benchmark and build for service pages and service landing pages (agencies, consultants, coaches, trades, clinics, law firms, SaaS), plus region and city pages. Input: a service, the business, a target area, the page URL if any. Runs four phases: the spec (SVC-01 to SVC-24 on top of the common C…
seo-local
Run spec, audit, competitor benchmark and build for local visibility, on the two assets a local business owns: the location page and the Google Business Profile, plus reviews and NAP citations. Spec: LOC, GBP, REV and CIT requirements with IDs. Audit: seoaudit.py and sectionaudit.py --type location on the page, a…
seo-content-comparison-page
Spec, audit, competitor benchmark and build for the bottom-funnel pages that capture buyers at the decision moment: 'X vs Y', 'alternatives to X', 'best X for Y', the comparison hub, and audience or segment pages ('for agencies', 'for freelancers'). Runs four phases: the CMP spec with stable IDs on top of the common…