Is llms-full.txt part of the llms.txt specification?

No. The llms.txt proposal does not define llms-full.txt. It is a convention, popularised by Mintlify in November 2024.

What is the difference between llms.txt and llms-full.txt?

llms.txt is a short Markdown map of a site's key pages, defined by the llms.txt proposal. llms-full.txt, by convention, holds the full text of the site in one file.

Does Shopify serve llms-full.txt?

Yes, but by default it mirrors /agents.md, which Shopify treats as the canonical agent-discovery file.

Should an online store publish llms-full.txt?

Usually it is optional. It suits documentation-style content. For a catalogue, pages, feeds and Markdown mirrors are easier to keep current.

Where did llms-ctx-full.txt go?

It was output of the old llms_txt2ctx context-expansion tool. llms.txt v2 no longer defines that mechanism.

Canonical definition

llms-full.txt – Definition (Not Part of the Spec)

llms-full.txt is a single file with the full text of a site for AI tools. It is a convention, not part of the llms.txt specification. The proposal defines /llms.txt, a short Markdown map of key pages. The full-text file grew out of older companion files and was popularised by Mintlify in November 2024.

In one sentence

A useful convention for documentation, often mistaken for part of the llms.txt standard.

Where llms-full.txt comes from

File	Defined by
`/llms.txt`	The llms.txt proposal (v2, revised 10 August 2026)
`llms-ctx.txt`, `llms-ctx-full.txt`	Output of the proposal’s old `llms_txt2ctx` tool. v2 no longer defines this context expansion
`/llms-full.txt`	Nobody formally. A convention, popularised when Mintlify rolled it out across its documentation sites in November 2024

So “llms-full.txt per spec” is wrong. Different name, different mechanism. The confusion is sticky because people half-remember the old -ctx-full files.

Who serves it

Documentation platforms such as Mintlify generate it for developer docs.
Shopify serves /llms-full.txt on every store, but by default it mirrors /agents.md, which Shopify made its canonical agent file. See AGENTS.md.
WordPress and Magento plugins, including ours, can generate it as an option.

Is it worth publishing?

For a documentation site read by coding assistants, often yes: one file with everything saves an agent many fetches. For a shop, the case is weaker. A full-text dump of every product page grows fast, goes stale fast, and duplicates what your pages, feeds and Markdown mirrors already say. Request data for llms.txt itself is low: in Ahrefs’ sample of 137,210 domains, 97% of valid llms.txt files got no requests in a month.

A reasonable default for a store

Publish /llms.txt as a short, correct map of key pages. Add llms-full.txt only if you have documentation-style content agents need in one place, and keep it small. Never describe it as part of the specification.

Questions

Is llms-full.txt part of the llms.txt specification?: No. The llms.txt proposal does not define llms-full.txt. It is a convention, popularised by Mintlify in November 2024.
What is the difference between llms.txt and llms-full.txt?: llms.txt is a short Markdown map of a site’s key pages, defined by the llms.txt proposal. llms-full.txt, by convention, holds the full text of the site in one file.
Does Shopify serve llms-full.txt?: Yes, but by default it mirrors /agents.md, which Shopify treats as the canonical agent-discovery file.
Should an online store publish llms-full.txt?: Usually it is optional. It suits documentation-style content. For a catalogue, pages, feeds and Markdown mirrors are easier to keep current.
Where did llms-ctx-full.txt go?: It was output of the old llms_txt2ctx context-expansion tool. llms.txt v2 no longer defines that mechanism.

Sources

Checked 28 September 2026 against llmstxt.org and Shopify’s theme documentation. Request figures from Ahrefs’ study of 137,210 domains (May 2026). Disclosure: we build an llms.txt module.