Free tool · no signup

Can ChatGPT actually recommend your store?

This fetches your storefront the way OpenAI's crawler does, opens real product pages from your own catalogue, and reports what a language model can read: price, stock, delivery and returns. It is a different question from SEO, and stores that rank well fail it all the time.

What we found across 69 DTC storefronts

We scanned 69 live direct-to-consumer stores on 10 August 2026 and could read 48 of them end to end. The percentages below are over those 48, because counting stores this scan never measured would be inventing numbers. Every scan since then, including yours, is added to the same set.

81%

publish Product structured data

81%

publish a machine-readable price

79%

publish stock status

15%

publish shipping details

15%

publish a return policy

31%

publish a review rating

Four out of five stores can tell an assistant what a product costs. Fewer than one in six can tell it what delivery costs or whether the thing can be sent back.

That is the whole opportunity. “Where can I buy a merino tee under $80 with free returns” is an ordinary shopping question, and almost nobody has published the answer in a form a model can read. Two of those fields, shippingDetails and hasMerchantReturnPolicy, are usually one block of Liquid.

3 of the stores we read had their product schema injected by JavaScript, which Google renders and AI crawlers do not, and 3 served a browser but refused the AI crawler outright. All three of those look completely healthy in Search Console.

Questions people ask before running this

How is this different from the store audit?
The store audit reads your whole catalogue and finds commercial faults: sold-out products still live, duplicate descriptions, missing metadata. This one asks a narrower question, whether a language model that cannot run JavaScript can read enough about your products to recommend them. Different question, different crawler, different fix list.
Which crawler do you pretend to be?
GPTBot, OpenAI's crawler, with its published user agent. We ask for your pages exactly the way it does and report what comes back. We also request your homepage with a normal browser user agent, so that when the two answers differ we can say so rather than guess.
My structured data is definitely there, Google Search Console says so.
That is the most interesting failure this tool finds, and three of the 69 stores we scanned have it. Google renders JavaScript before reading a page, so schema injected by a script is fine as far as Search Console is concerned. GPTBot, ClaudeBot and PerplexityBot do not render JavaScript. If a script builds your ld+json tag after load, Google sees perfect structured data and an AI assistant sees none at all.
Do you store my store URL?
Yes, and only what the scan measured: the hostname, the timestamp, and the true or false answers you can see on this page. No page content, no email unless you type one in, no cookie. The rows exist so we can publish how the whole set of stores is doing, which is where the percentages on this page come from.
Is scoring zero bad?
It means an assistant could open your product pages and found no machine-readable product data in them. It is worth fixing and it is usually a theme-level change rather than a rebuild. What we will never do is score a store we could not read, because that would be an accusation rather than a measurement.

Looking for commercial faults rather than AI readability? The free store audit reads your entire product catalogue. Want AI referrals tracked once they arrive? AgentEdge is our Shopify App Store listing that attributes revenue back to the assistant that sent the shopper.