Why a rule says "not assessable"

Some rules end with the result "not assessable" instead of pass, partial or fail. This page answers the common questions about it.

What does "not assessable" mean?

The check could not read what it needed, so EchoPilot reports that fact and the reason instead of guessing. The rule is left out of its category's score entirely, and a category with nothing assessable is left out of the overall. It is never counted as a failure. The report shows the count and the reason on each affected row.

Which reasons can a rule give?

Every reason is shown in plain words on the report. The full list:

• source not configured (credential missing) — an external API (PageSpeed, search results, Places, the AI-visibility source, the language model) is not set up on the server.
• robots.txt disallows this path / robots.txt could not be fetched — the crawler honours your robots.txt and never assumes permission; see What the crawler fetches.
• the page redirected off the site — a redirect left your registrable domain; the crawler does not follow it.
• skipped for this business type — a vertical override skipped the rule.
• no matching Google Business Profile — the Places lookup found nothing for the listing you gave.
• field not exposed by the Places API — the public Places API does not return this field; connecting your profile as the owner unlocks it.
• Google Business Profile not connected / connected; choose the location under Integrations / Business Profile API unavailable (quota or access not granted) — the owner-side connection is missing, has more than one location and none chosen, or Google refused the request. See Connecting Google Business Profile.
• social profile not readable without a token / posts need an official platform token / profile metadata not readable / no social handles given at intake — social checks read public metadata only until social accounts can be connected.
• answer missing from intake — the rule reads an answer you left blank in the wizard (newsletter date, Search Console, ad tracking); fill it in at /app/business/edit.
• monthly LLM token cap reached — the account's language-model budget for the month is used up.
• the site did not answer in time / network error reaching the site / TLS certificate problem — the fetch failed.
• page budget for this run exhausted — the crawl reached its page limit before this check's page.
• fewer than two logo sources available / logo image could not be fetched — the brand-consistency image comparison had nothing to compare.
• internal check error (logged) — a check threw an unexpected error; it is logged for the operator and the rule is still not counted as a failure.

A check that runs longer than its time limit is also marked not assessable rather than failed.

Why is it never a failure?

Because a missing source says nothing about your business. Missing credentials and external failures always produce a not-assessable result with a reason. A run itself only fails on a database error, an invalid rule set or a bug in EchoPilot, and that state is labelled separately on the report.

What if a rule has more than one source?

Alternatives, written a|b, are tried left to right and the first source that answers wins: G2, L1, L5, L7, L11, R4 and R5 read the owner-side profile when connected and fall back to public Places data otherwise. Composites, written a+b, need every source; the first one that cannot answer ends the check with its reason.

Does a required rule change anything?

If your business type requires a rule and it could not be evaluated, the report lists it under "Required for this vertical, could not evaluate". It stays not assessable; EchoPilot does not assume a fail.

How do I reduce the count?

The reasons tell you. Connecting Google Business Profile at /app/integrations unlocks seven checks; filling the optional intake fields unlocks the intake rules; allowing EchoRankBot in robots.txt unlocks the page-based rules. The memo's watchlist lists the ones worth unlocking before the next run.