In the high-stakes poker game of Modern SEO, llms.txt is the competitor’s accidental “tell.”

For two decades, we have scraped sitemaps to understand a competitor’s scale. We have scraped RSS feeds to understand their publishing velocity. But sitemaps are noisy—they contain every tag page, every archive, every piece of legacy drift. They tell you what exists, but they don’t tell you what matters.

The llms.txt file is different. It is a curated, high-stakes declaration of what a website owner believes is their most valuable information. By defining this file, they are explicitly telling OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google: “If you only read 50 pages on my site to answer a user’s question, read these.”

The Mathematics of Semantic Chunking: Optimizing Retrieval Density

In the frantic gold rush of 2024 to build Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) applications, we committed a collective sin of optimization. We obsessed over the model (GPT-4 vs. Claude 3.5), we obsessed over the vector database (Pinecone vs. Weaviate), and we obsessed over the prompt.

But we ignored the input.

Most RAG pipelines today still rely on a primitive, brute-force method of data ingestion: Fixed-Size Chunking. We take a document, we slice it every 512 tokens, we add a 50-token overlap, and we pray that we didn’t cut a critical sentence in half.