Your Website May Soon Need a Version for Agents

OpenAI is pushing a standard that would let websites talk directly to AI agents, declaring what actions they offer rather than making an agent read the page and click things like a person. It is early, it is a proposal with a developer challenge attached, and it may not survive in this form. It is still worth noticing, because websites have been built on one assumption for thirty years, which is that a human is looking at them.

Agents are pretending to be people

Right now, when an agent uses your website, it reads the page and clicks things the way a person would. That fails in predictable ways. It misreads layouts. It gets lost in unusual navigation. It breaks the week after you redesign.

It is not much better from your side. You get traffic you cannot identify, forms filled in by something that is not a customer, and no say in how you are represented to whoever sent the agent. Nobody chose this arrangement. It is just what happens when software built for one kind of visitor meets another kind.

What a declared interface changes

The proposal is that a site states what it can do. Booking an appointment is an available action, here is what it needs. Checking availability is another. The agent stops guessing and the business decides what is on offer.

That third row is the one business owners should care about most, because it converts an uncontrolled situation into a decision.

You do not need to build anything

Let me be direct about this, because someone will try to sell you a project on the back of this news. It is a proposed standard. Adoption is unproven. Building for it now means building for something that may change shape entirely, and if it does become real, your website platform will almost certainly support it before you would have got round to implementing it yourself.

The genuinely useful step is cheaper and pays off either way: make sure the information on your site is accurate, current, and structured sensibly, because that is what assistants use to describe you today. We set out the approach in optimising for AI search, and it is worth doing whether or not any of this arrives.

Who should watch more closely

If customers complete something on your website, this matters to you sooner. Booking an appointment. Ordering. Requesting a quote. Checking whether you have something in stock.

Those are precisely the actions an agent would want to perform for someone, which means being agent-accessible could translate into actual bookings rather than remaining a technical curiosity. It is the same direction as assistants becoming a place where transactions happen, covered in customers ordering inside AI assistants. If your site is a brochure that leads to a phone call, this is a story to follow rather than a project to start.

Decide what an agent may do

If this does arrive, there is one decision worth having thought about in advance. There is a real gap between letting an agent check your availability and letting it make a booking on someone's behalf.

Reading is low risk. Acting is not, and the failure modes are things like a booking made by an agent for a customer who did not quite mean it. That is the same read-versus-write distinction we drew in capability shipping ahead of controls, arriving now on your own website rather than inside your systems. Default to read-only when the option appears, and add actions deliberately.

The thirty-year assumption

Everything about a website assumes eyes. Layout, visual hierarchy, colour, the position of the button. All of it exists to guide a human through a decision, and we have spent three decades getting good at it.

An agent needs none of that and is actively hindered by some of it. Whether the answer turns out to be WebMCP or something else entirely, the pressure to serve two very different kinds of visitor is not going away. That is worth understanding now even though it requires nothing of you today, because the businesses that get caught out by these shifts are usually the ones who first heard about them when a competitor had already adapted.

Frequently Asked Questions