History & Trends → Severity, Lighthouse and other measures across 2 weeks.
Performance impact
How far pages fall short of Google's "good" benchmarks: Largest Contentful Paint ≤ 2.5s and page weight ≤ 1.6 MB. Lower is better.
Avg extra LCP over 2.5s
3.4s 73/73 pages over
Avg extra weight over 1.6 MB
1.81 MB 81/81 pages over
Set page_loads_per_week for this target to also estimate total wasted time and data (the way daily-dap uses traffic counts).
Medians across sampled pages
Performance
54/100
Accessibility
97/100
Best practices
73/100
SEO
100/100
Agentic browsing
50/100
Largest Contentful Paint
4.2s
First Contentful Paint
3.8s
Speed Index
3.8s
Total Blocking Time
1.0s
Cumulative Layout Shift
0.031
Recommendations
Issues Lighthouse flagged across the 73 sampled page(s), beyond the headline scores — grouped by category and ranked by how many pages they affect. Estimated savings (transfer bytes or load time) are Lighthouse's own estimates where available. Accessibility audits are intentionally omitted; they overlap with the axe-core findings on the Accessibility page.
Performance
Performance recommendations from Lighthouse, by sampled pages affected.
Recommendation
Pages
Est. saving
Render-blocking requests
73/73
175.9s
Reduce JavaScript execution time
73/73
96.6s
Reduce unused JavaScript
73/73
39.0 MB · 53.1s
Minimize main-thread work
73/73
92.6s
First Contentful Paint
73/73
—
Largest Contentful Paint
73/73
—
Total Blocking Time
73/73
—
Max Potential First Input Delay
73/73
—
Time to Interactive
73/73
—
Network dependency tree
73/73
—
Reduce unused CSS
70/73
2.2 MB · 13.8s
Use efficient cache lifetimes
59/73
12.7s
Speed Index
52/73
—
Layout shift culprits
20/73
—
Font display
14/73
0.7s
Forced reflow
10/73
—
Page prevented back/forward cache restoration
1/73
—
Best Practices
Best Practices recommendations from Lighthouse, by sampled pages affected.
Recommendation
Pages
Est. saving
Browser errors were logged to the console
73/73
—
Uses third-party cookies
73/73
—
Issues were logged in the `Issues` panel in Chrome Devtools
73/73
—
Missing source maps for large first-party JavaScript
3/73
—
Agentic (AI-readiness)
Agentic (AI-readiness) recommendations from Lighthouse, by sampled pages affected.
Recommendation
Pages
Est. saving
Accessibility tree is not well-formed
73/73
—
WebMCP tools registered
73/73
—
WebMCP form coverage
73/73
—
WebMCP schemas are valid
73/73
—
llms.txt follows recommendations
73/73
—
`ai-catalog.json` schema is valid
73/73
—
Cumulative Layout Shift
20/73
—
What the Agentic score means
The Agentic (AI-readiness) score is new in Google Lighthouse (13.4+). It measures how well a page works for AI agents and assistants — the tools that increasingly mediate how people find and use government services. It checks for things like an llms.txt file (a machine-readable guide for language models), valid structured data, a well-formed accessibility tree that agents can parse, and WebMCP tool/form descriptions. A higher score means an AI assistant is more likely to understand the page and complete tasks on a citizen's behalf correctly.
It is experimental and evolving; treat it as a forward-looking signal, not a compliance requirement. Median across sampled pages: 50/100.
Gaps found on the sampled pages: Accessibility tree is not well-formed (73), WebMCP tools registered (73), WebMCP form coverage (73), WebMCP schemas are valid (73), llms.txt follows recommendations (73), `ai-catalog.json` schema is valid (73), Cumulative Layout Shift (20).
Per-page results
Lighthouse scores and Core Web Vitals per sampled page (2026-W45). Agentic = experimental agentic-browsing score. PWA / offline readiness is tracked in the Standards tab (Lighthouse 12+ removed the PWA category). — click a column heading to sort