Ghost vs WordPress.com for AI agents
Ghost is more ready for AI agents than WordPress.com: 73 vs 49 out of 100. Ghost is ahead on letting AI agents in (no bot wall), llms.txt and labelled form fields. WordPress.com is ahead on named buttons and links and image alt text.
What an agent finds
| Ghost | WordPress.com | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 73/100 | 49/100 |
| Blocks AI agents | No | bot wall |
| robots.txt disallows | No AI bots | No AI bots |
| llms.txt | On the docs host | none found |
| Remote MCP server | none found | none found |
| Docs MCP server | docs.ghost.org/mcp | none found |
| OpenAPI spec | none found | none found |
| Developer docs | docs.ghost.org/ | none found |
| Public pricing | ghost.org/pricing/ | wordpress.com/de/pricing/ |
| Self-serve sign-up | No self-serve page we could open | No self-serve page we could open |
Check by check
60 core points every site needs, plus 40 split between letting an agent sign a team up and connecting through the API. Sign-up and API checks count half each.
| Check | Points | Ghost | WordPress.com |
|---|---|---|---|
| Core | 52 | 38 | |
| Agents get the real page, not a bot wall | 12 | ✓ | · |
| robots.txt lets user-triggered agents in | 6 | ✓ | ✓ |
| Answer-engine crawlers are allowed | 4 | ✓ | ✓ |
| Content is in the raw HTML | 6 | ✓ | ✓ |
| Semantic HTML (main, nav, header) | 4 | ✓ | ✓ |
| Icon buttons and links have names | 3 | · | ✓ |
| Form fields have labels | 3 | ✓ | · |
| Images have alt text | 3 | · | ✓ |
| The page has an H1 | 2 | ✓ | ✓ |
| Structured data (JSON-LD) | 5 | ✓ | ✓ |
| Meta description and Open Graph tags | 3 | ✓ | ✓ |
| sitemap.xml | 3 | ✓ | · |
| llms.txt | 4 | ✓ | · |
| Dates show the content is fresh | 2 | · | ✓ |
| Sign-up | 12 | 9 | |
| Public pricing page | 5 | ✓ | ✓ |
| A self-serve sign-up link | 4 | ✓ | ✓ |
| Sign-up page opens for agents | 3 | · | · |
| A free plan or trial | 3 | ✓ | · |
| No card needed to start | 2 | · | · |
| SoftwareApplication data | 3 | · | · |
| API | 8.5 | 1.5 | |
| OpenAPI spec | 3.5 | · | · |
| Remote MCP server | 4 | · | · |
| Docs as markdown | 2.5 | ✓ | · |
| Self-serve API keys | 3 | ✓ | · |
| OAuth client self-registration | 2.5 | · | · |
| OAuth discovery metadata | 1.5 | · | · |
| SDKs and a CLI | 1.5 | ✓ | ✓ |
| Free tier or test keys | 1.5 | ✓ | · |
Automated, read-only scan of each homepage, robots.txt, llms.txt, docs, OpenAPI paths and MCP endpoints on 3 Nov 2026. How scoring works.
Check them again today
Sites change. Run the live scan for the current result, or check your own site.
Questions
Is Ghost or WordPress.com better for AI agents?
Ghost is more ready for AI agents than WordPress.com: 73 vs 49 out of 100. Ghost is ahead on letting AI agents in (no bot wall), llms.txt and labelled form fields. WordPress.com is ahead on named buttons and links and image alt text. Scores are from our scan on 3 Nov 2026.
Does Ghost have an MCP server?
Only for its docs. Our scan reached a docs MCP server at https://docs.ghost.org/mcp on 3 Nov 2026, but none for the product itself at the usual addresses.
Does WordPress.com have an MCP server?
Not one we could find. On 3 Nov 2026 our scan found no remote MCP server for WordPress.com at the usual addresses (mcp.wordpress.com/mcp, api.wordpress.com/mcp, the docs host, or any MCP URL linked from its homepage or llms.txt).
Does Ghost block AI agents?
No. Ghost served its homepage to an AI user-agent and its robots.txt doesn't disallow any of the AI crawlers we check.
Does WordPress.com block AI agents?
Yes. WordPress.com returned a bot challenge or an error page to an AI user-agent on 3 Nov 2026, so assistants can't read the site when a user asks them to.