Autumn Sale: 20% off almost everything until 24 DecemberSee the sale →
See all 402 products Free UK delivery over £35
CompanyThe newsroom

Most of the web is closing the door to AI. We opened ours.

Publishers are blocking AI crawlers to protect their content. teas.co.uk lets every well behaved assistant in to know the shop, cite it and send buyers, and keeps the rest out.

10 minute read By Lee Samuel Tucker

Read the story →
Publishers are blocking AI crawlers to protect their content. teas.co.uk lets every well behaved assistant in to know the shop, cite it and send buyers, and keeps the rest out.

Somebody asks their AI assistant for a strong breakfast tea that is good with milk and costs under 5p a cup.

That is the example on our page for AI assistants. For that person to end up with a good box of tea from us, the assistant has to know we exist, know what we sell and trust the price it quotes. It can only learn that if we let it read the shop. So we do, and that puts us on the opposite side from most of the people I read.

Most of the industry is closing the door

If you read Search Engine Journal, or follow search and AI at all, you will know the mood. The advice is defensive: which AI bots to block, whether to block them in robots.txt or at the server, how to stop them taking work without paying.

The Reuters Institute found that by the end of 2023, 48% of the most used news websites across ten countries were blocking OpenAI's crawlers. In July 2025 Cloudflare started blocking AI crawlers by default for new customers unless they choose otherwise, and launched Pay Per Crawl so site owners can charge crawlers for each request. In January 2026 Search Engine Journal reported a BuzzStream study of 100 top US and UK news sites: 79% block at least one AI training bot, and 71% block at least one bot that assistants use for live search.

I understand why. For a newspaper, the words are the product. If an assistant reads the article, answers the question and sends nobody back, the publisher has given away what it sells. The Reuters Institute lists the worries: no payment for training, wrong answers carrying the publisher's name, and readers who never come back. Those are real reasons.

Why I went the other way

I sell tea. The product is a box of Yorkshire Tea or a tin of matcha, and an assistant cannot take that away by reading about it. In a tea shop, the information is the shop window. A product page, a brewing guide or a price per cup is only worth something if people see it.

When I rebuilt the site for version two, which went live on 10 May 2026, I made one choice that everything else follows from. We open up to every AI that behaves well, so that as many assistants as possible know the shop, quote it accurately and cite it. Citations bring visitors, and visitors are where sales come from. That is the whole reason the site is built this way.

There is a second reason, and it grows every month. People no longer ask assistants in three words. They ask the way they would ask someone behind a counter: a strong breakfast tea for a house that drinks it all day, with milk, under 5p a cup, nothing smoky. I call a request like that Premium Intent, a term I coined in June 2026 for a request that arrives whole, with its context, constraints, budget and what a good result looks like. "Premium" describes how much the request tells you, not a fee. An assistant carrying one needs a shop it can read in full and check, and a shop that is hidden or hard to read cannot answer it, however good its tea.

"For a newspaper, the words are the product. For a tea shop, the words are the shop window. I want every good assistant looking through it."

What is actually open

All of this is public. I read it on 14 November 2026.

Our robots.txt names one AI crawler to keep out: the crawler run by the world's biggest online shop, the everything store that can deliver almost anything by tomorrow. Every other compliant AI fetcher is allowed and pointed straight to files written for them: llms.txt, agents.json, ai-entry.json and more. What stays closed to all crawlers is the basket, the checkout, customer accounts, site search and the endless filter combinations.

Our agents.json sets the content signals for AI training, AI search and AI input all to "yes", on one condition: cite and attribute teas.co.uk. Under the Hood counts 49,324 citation anchors, places an assistant can quote exactly, across 3,173 pages.

Assistants can act as well as read. Since 6 October 2026, an assistant can, with the customer's go ahead, search the catalogue, compare teas, fill a basket and hand over a checkout link through the teas.co.uk MCP server. Our AI page lists the assistants that can connect, with ChatGPT still under review by OpenAI.

Open is not the same as unguarded

Opening the door does not mean leaving the till unattended. This is what our public files say about bad actors.

Break the rules and you lose your welcome. Under the Hood records that the crawler run by the world's biggest online shop ignored the limits the shop published. It is refused in robots.txt, and a second refusal at server level was added on 3 August 2026. Its requests stay on the record and count towards nothing. The cache still answers some of them, so we do not claim the block is total.

Limits follow real addresses, not names. Anyone can claim to be a well known AI bot. Our Ask API gives verified OpenAI and Anthropic address ranges 1,000 requests an hour each, "checked against the published ranges and never the user agent". Everyone else gets 60 an hour per address. The MCP server has its own limits, and anything over a limit is told how long to wait.

The assistant never holds the money. The customer opens the basket on teas.co.uk, checks it and pays there. The assistant never sees card details or a password and cannot place an order. Payment, refunds, account creation, address and password changes and spending reward points are on the list of things no agent can do. Staff accounts cannot be linked to an assistant.

Customer data stays out of the window. Our agents.json states that the public AI feeds do not expose customer, order, address or payment data.

Questions are checked for tampering. Every reply from our Ask API includes a safety field that says whether the question looked like a prompt injection: an attempt to slip instructions to the assistant inside an ordinary question.

"Open to every good actor. Closed to the ones that ignore the rules. Payment always stays with the customer, on teas.co.uk."

What it has brought, counted separately

A machine reading a page, a person visiting and a customer buying are different events, and Under the Hood never adds them together. Read live on 14 November 2026:

  • Pages served to named AI systems: 152,213, from 2 June to 14 November 2026, not counting that refused crawler.
  • Visits from AI answers: 2,761 browser sessions, from 10 May to 14 November 2026.
  • Orders: of 161 paid orders since version two went live on 10 May 2026 (236 since the shop's first order, 75 of them on version one), 5 arrived on a link carrying an AI assistant's own tag, 1 probably came through an assistant, and 1 customer told us an assistant sent them. 2 of the tagged orders were later refunded.

The exchange is uneven, which is exactly the publishers' complaint. Agents naming OpenAI were served 45,136 pages and 1,043 visits came back, about 43 pages for each visit. Cloudflare has measured the same imbalance across the web in the crawl-to-click gap.

Search still does more. Of those version two orders, search engines brought 71, and the origin of 47 could not be traced. Google search clicks rose from about 160 a day in August to 468 a day in November 2026, with no advertising bought. I cannot prove how much of that comes from being easy for machines to read, so I will not claim it.

Why the site is built like this

Everything about how the site works follows from that open door: one checked set of product facts that a person, a search engine and an assistant all read the same way, structured data behind every product including price per cup, an Ask API that asks for the full human request rather than a keyword summary, and public counting rules.

If you invite every assistant in, what they find had better be true. That is the commercial reason behind what I call the truth entity.

"Most of the web is protecting its content from AI. I built a tea shop that wants to be read, quoted and recommended, and made sure what it says is true."

What others have found

Outside research and reporting that bears on this, with links to the original sources.

Read more

  • Premium Intent: a term I coined in June 2026 for a full human request, carrying its context, constraints, budget and what success looks like, and the kind of request our Ask API is built to receive.
  • Truth entity: my name for an owned source of truth about a business, one checked set of facts with the proof attached, that people, search engines and assistants all read the same way.
  • The complete payload: the full, structured answer a shop hands an assistant in one trip, from what the product is to the route to buy it.
  • Under the Hood: every figure above, with its source, window and rule.
  • Meet the founder: why I built teas.co.uk
  • Lee Samuel Tucker in the Tea Wiki

Sources

More from the news

Lee Samuel Tucker
Founder, teas.co.uk
Tunbridge Wells, Kent

From the catalogue

Browse our tea range

Keep reading

More from the newsroom

Stock alerts, brand changes and the newest wiki work, in the order it happened.

All 25 stories →
1 / 3 · swipe for more
Tea notes and stock updates

Useful tea notes, only when there is something to say.

Stock arrivals, buying notes and practical guidance from the catalogue. No filler, no daily noise, unsubscribe in one click.

By family

By moment

Brand of the monthHyson Seasonal taster packsHow the seasonal bundles work Tea of the Month ClubCurator-picked monthly box Find your tea60-second quiz 0 Basket £0.00
See all 402 products