WO
Workana Site Review Crawler
GoodBotVerifiedBOTWorkana crawler that reviews public websites to generate verifiable digital presence reports.
Identification
Bot name
Workana Site Review Crawler
Category
Academic Research
Kind
BOT
Verification
Verified bot
Cloudflare slug
workana-site-review-crawler
Rated Oct 24, 2026 from public evidence
How we rated this bot
Verified by Cloudflare, which confirms who runs it, with no widespread reports of abuse.
Names itself honestly
Yes
Verified by Cloudflare
Yes
Says it follows robots.txt and opt-outs
Not stated
Ignores site rules
None found
Disguises itself or evades blocks
None found
Overloads sites
None found
How widely people complain
No complaint about this bot in the evidence
Reddit discussion
There is no Reddit discussion of this bot in the evidence
What we read
- To block or not to block? Bot is the question.
- Robots.txt vs. AI Blockers: Managing Who Scrapes Your Content
- AI Crawlers & robots.txt: What 98 B2B Software Sites Do | Frase
- A new web crawler launched by Meta last month is quietly scraping the internet for AI training data
- Should I Block AI Crawlers At Robots.txt Or Server Level? – Ask An SEO
Block or allow Workana Site Review Crawler
Block it
Add a Disallow rule for Workana Site Review Crawler in your robots.txt file. You can also block at the server level using your web server configuration or CDN firewall rules to filter requests matching the user-agent string.
# Block Workana Site Review Crawler from crawling your entire site User-agent: Workana Site Review Crawler Disallow: / # Allow Workana Site Review Crawler full access User-agent: Workana Site Review Crawler Allow: /
Allow & verify
Ensure your robots.txt allows Workana Site Review Crawler. Verify requests by checking the user-agent string.
Traffic & trends
Cloudflare Radar traffic
No Cloudflare traffic data available.
Google Trends interest
Loading trend data…
Links & references
Data sources
This profile is compiled from the following sources.
CloudflareRadar
Last updated October 25, 2026
Something wrong with this entry? Suggest a correction