Is Agentic audits now highlight checks by site type: App, Commerce, Docs, Business

What changed

According to a changelog post on the Vercel blog, Is Agentic - the site check tool at is-agentic.com - now lets readers view a report's results through one of four site types: Docs & content, Business, App, or Commerce. The change is presentational rather than structural. The checks a report runs and the score it produces remain the same; only which checks get foregrounded shifts depending on the selected view.

How each view is organized

The intent is to surface the checks that actually matter for a given kind of property. Per the Vercel post:

• The Commerce view emphasizes standards for payments and checkout, such as x402, UCP and ACP.
• The App view emphasizes API discovery, authentication, error handling and SDK support.
• The Docs & content and Business views serve the same purpose for their categories, though the post does not list their checks in comparable detail.

One score, no rescan required

Vercel says a site's score is identical no matter which view is selected, which keeps results comparable across sites of different types. Readers can also switch views on an already-generated report without triggering a rescan - the view acts as a lens over data that has already been collected, not as a new run.

Declaring a default site type

Site owners can control which view readers see first by adding a single meta tag to the page's head, named is-agentic-site-type. The accepted values map to the four categories: content for Docs & content, business for Business, app for App, and store for Commerce.

The post includes two caveats worth noting. The tag only sets the default presentation - it does not add points or alter the score in any way. And if a site declares no type at all, Is Agentic will infer one and display which type it chose, so undeclared sites still get a sensible default rather than an unfiltered report.

Why it matters

Audit tools that flatten every check into one list tend to blur relevance: a checkout protocol is central to a storefront but noise for a documentation site, while API discovery matters far more to an app than to a marketing page. Letting the same report be read through a site-type lens preserves a single comparable score while making the actionable subset obvious for each audience - a store team sees payment standards first, an app team sees API and auth checks first.

The opt-in meta tag also gives site owners a measure of editorial control over how their report reads, without opening any path to gaming the number itself. Automatic inference covers sites that never declare a type, at the cost of an occasional mismatch between what a site is and what the tool guesses. For teams already running these audits, this is a modest but practical quality-of-life update: the same data, with a sharper focus depending on who is reading it.