- Visibility13
- Citations0
- Sentiment50
- Site quality73
- AI readiness36
AI assistants name Intellia Therapeutics in 13.3% of answers, a bit more often than the typical company in the technology sector. Its overall score is 30 out of 100, ranking 1,203rd of 2,047 companies. The website passes 5 of 14 technical checks for how ready it is for AI tools.
We asked 15 unbranded questions about the technology market: none named Intellia Therapeutics. AI assistants named it in 8 of 60 answers (13.3%). The typical technology company is named in 10.0% of answers. By how often it is named, Intellia Therapeutics ranks 111 of 273 in its sector.
Every dot is a company in the study. Hover one to see it; click to open its report.
This companySame sectorEvery other companyNever named
Five parts, each scored out of 100.
How often AI assistants name the company
How often AI uses the company's own website as a source
How positively AI describes the company
How well built the website's own pages are
How easily AI tools can read and use the website
Visibility is calculated from the answers on this page. How the score is built.
273 companies in this sector. The line on each bar is the typical company.
An answer that names the company
“Which advanced genetic therapies are currently available for in vivo genome editing in the United States?”
While exagamglogene autotemcel (exa-cel), marketed as Casgevy, is the first and currently only CRISPR-based therapy to receive regulatory approval internationally (including in the US and UK) for sickle cell disease and transfusion-dependent beta-thalassemia, it is an ex vivo gene-editing therapy, meaning cells are edited outside the body and then returned to the patient.
As of late 2024 and early 2025, there are no in vivo genome editing therapies broadly available in the United States that have completed the full FDA approval process for routine clinical practice. However, several advan …
The AI’s answer as we received it, shortened and not checked for accuracy.
How the mentions in these answers were split between this company and its rivals
Answers naming it, out of answers received
What this website publishes for an AI agent to read, use and buy from, on a scale of six levels.
- 0
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
Level 1: Basic web presence. Two of robots.txt, a sitemap and Link headers are in place.
- Content Signals
Show every check, for your technical teamHide the checks
- study: 92.0%robots.txtPassed
A valid robots.txt with crawl rules at the site root.
- study: 86.8%SitemapPartly met
Serve an XML sitemap and reference it from robots.txt.
- study: 0.3%Link headersNot met
Send Link headers such as rel="api-catalog" or rel="describedby" on the homepage.
- study: 5.5%DNS for AI DiscoveryNot present
Advertise agent endpoints with SVCB records under _agents.
- study: 1.9%Markdown negotiationNot met
Return a markdown version when asked with Accept: text/markdown, for example at the CDN.
- study: 25.1%llms.txtNot met
Publish an llms.txt with a short summary and the key links.
- study: 93.4%AI bot rulesPartly met
Add explicit robots.txt groups for the main AI crawlers.
- study: 1.4%Content SignalsNot met
Add a Content-Signal line for search, ai-input and ai-train to robots.txt.
- study: 0.2%Web Bot AuthNot present
Only relevant if you run your own agents or crawlers: publish a signing key directory.
- study: 0.3%API CatalogNot met
List public APIs in a linkset at /.well-known/api-catalog.
- study: 11.8%OAuth discoveryPartly met
Publish OpenID Connect or OAuth server metadata under /.well-known.
- study: 10.3%OAuth Protected ResourcePassed
Metadata telling agents which authorization server to use.
- study: 0.0%auth.mdNot met
Publish an auth.md describing how agents sign in.
- study: 0.2%MCP Server CardNot met
Offer an MCP server and publish its server card under /.well-known.
- study: 0.1%A2A Agent CardNot met
Publish an agent card at /.well-known/agent-card.json.
- study: 0.2%Agent SkillsNot met
Publish a skills index with the main tasks agents can do.
- study: 33.7%WebMCPCould not check
Register key actions such as search or cart as WebMCP tools.
- study: 0.1%ARD manifestNot met
Publish an ai-catalog.json listing every agent interface.
Score 30 of 100 · 97% of checks could run · checked on October 5, 2026 · www.intelliatx.com · 2,047 companies scanned
5 of 14 passed. This list is for your technical team. The percentage is how many companies in the study pass each check.
These 14 checks ran during the audit and are what the AI readiness part of the overall score counts. The scan above ran later and is stricter on Link headers and Markdown, so a check can pass here and not there.
Show the 14 checksHide them
- Passedrobots.txt publishedstudy: 85.0%
- Not metXML sitemapstudy: 73.2%
- PassedHTTP Link headers (RFC 8288)study: 29.0%
- Not metMarkdown content negotiationstudy: 8.3%
- Not metllms.txt publishedstudy: 21.7%
- PassedToken budget (page weight)study: 95.2%
- Not metExplicit AI bot rulesstudy: 13.0%
- Not metAPI Catalog (.well-known/api-catalog)study: 0.2%
- PassedOAuth Authorization Server discoverystudy: 10.1%
- PassedOAuth Protected Resource discoverystudy: 9.3%
- Not metMCP Server Cardstudy: 0.0%
- Not metA2A Agent Cardstudy: 0.0%
- Not metWebMCP toolsstudy: 4.2%
- Not metAgent Skills declaredstudy: 0.0%
This website sets no rules for any AI crawler by name, like 84% of the websites whose rules we could read. Every AI crawler follows its general rules.
- GPTBotpartly
- ClaudeBotpartly
- Anthropic-AIpartly
- Google-Extendedpartly
- Applebot-Extendedpartly
- Meta-ExternalAgentpartly
- FacebookBotpartly
- Bytespiderpartly
- CCBotpartly
- Diffbotpartly
- Omgilibotpartly
- OAI-SearchBotpartly
- Claude-SearchBotpartly
- PerplexityBotpartly
- Applebotpartly
- Amazonbotpartly
- YouBotpartly
- ChatGPT-Userpartly
- Claude-Userpartly
- Perplexity-Userpartly
- DuckAssistBotpartly
- MistralAI-Userpartly
Read from the website’s own rules file (robots.txt). An asterisk marks a crawler the file names. The rest follow its general rules. “Partly” means only some pages are blocked.
How many times each website was listed as a source in these answers
In the study as US-listed.
- What options exist for patients not eligible for genome editing therapies?
- How do ex vivo vs in vivo genome editing approaches differ for treating hereditary disorders?
- Which advanced genetic therapies are currently available for in vivo genome editing in the United States?
- Is enrolling in a clinical trial for a genome editing therapy worth it for individuals with rare genetic conditions?
- How is the cost of clinical-stage gene editing treatment determined?
- What are the most promising clinical-stage genome editing therapies for rare genetic diseases?
- Gene editing vs gene therapy: What are the main differences for patients seeking curative treatments?
- How can CRISPR-based genome editing be applied to treat blood disorders like sickle cell disease?
- What should patients consider before choosing a CRISPR-based therapy for inherited disorders?
- How are clinical-stage genome editing therapeutics being used to target liver diseases?
- Are there non-CRISPR genome editing methods used in clinical trials today?
- What price ranges can patients expect for advanced genome editing therapies in the U.S.?
- How do adverse events present in patients receiving advanced gene editing treatments?
- What are the main alternatives to CRISPR-based therapeutics for genetic disease treatment?
- What are some common challenges in administering clinical-stage genome editing therapies?
Columns, left to right: OpenAI, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini. The AI assistants often disagree. Across the study, on 40% of the questions where a company is named, only one of the four names it.
A badge of this result that you can show on your own website. Copy the code below.
<a href="https://aeo-audit.rezolve.com/us/intelliatx.com"><img src="https://aeo-audit.rezolve.com/us/badges/intelliatx.com.svg" alt="Overall score 30 of 100, US AI Visibility Study 2026" width="280" height="64"></a>