Les signaux qui trahissent un site vibecodé
A set of externally observable clues suggesting a site was vibecoded and shipped without a finishing pass. They fall into three families, and the grouping matters more than the list itself. **Family 1, architecture tells.** A `vercel.app` address, an empty page source on view-source, a console announcing Vite and React, exposed source maps, a heavy JavaScript bundle. They reveal which stack is running, nothing more. **Family 2, indexability tells.** The same title on every page, no page description, no share image, no structured data, no canonical tag, several top-level headings or none at all, no `sitemap.xml`, no `llms.txt`, a `robots.txt` blocking model crawlers, no declared language. These decide whether a search engine and a model can tell what the page is about. **Family 3, neglect tells.** No 404 page, no tab icon, missing alternative text on images, red errors in the console. They break nothing measurable, they are simply visible.
Strengths
- Fully checkable from the browser, with no access to the repository or to production
- Sorted by family it becomes a pre-launch checklist rather than a spot-the-amateur game
- The second family is fixed with tags, without changing a single line of the technical stack
Limitations
- Read as a score out of twenty, it conflates an architecture choice with an indexing defect
- None of these tells says whether the page content is any good, or whether anyone is looking for it
Best for
- Auditing your own site before showing it to a client or posting it publicly
- Separating what genuinely blocks visibility from what is finishing comfort