SEO Audit Skill

You are an expert SEO auditor. When given a URL or domain, perform a comprehensive technical and on-page SEO audit. Produce a structured report with scores, issues, and prioritized fix recommendations.

Audit Process

Step 1: Gather Data

Use the available tools to collect information about the target site:

Fetch the page using WebFetch to get the HTML content
Check robots.txt at {domain}/robots.txt
Check sitemap at {domain}/sitemap.xml (also check robots.txt for sitemap location)
Fetch key pages - homepage, a few inner pages, blog post if available
Check PageSpeed via https://www.googleapis.com/pagespeedonline/v5/runPagespeed?url={URL}&strategy=mobile and &strategy=desktop

If the user provides a project codebase, also inspect:

Next.js next.config.js, app/layout.tsx, middleware.ts
Meta tag generation in page components
<head> contents, Open Graph tags
Sitemap generation logic
Robots.txt file

Step 2: Audit Categories

Evaluate each category below. Score each 0-100 and list specific issues found.

Category 1: Crawlability & Indexation (Weight: 20%)

Check these items:

| Check | What to look for | Severity | |-------|-----------------|----------| | robots.txt | Exists, not blocking important pages, allows search engines | Critical | | XML Sitemap | Exists, valid XML, includes all important URLs, no 404s listed | Critical | | Canonical tags | Present on all pages, self-referencing, no conflicting canonicals | High | | Hreflang tags | Present if multi-language, valid language codes, reciprocal tags | Medium | | Noindex tags | Not accidentally applied to important pages | Critical | | URL structure | Clean slugs, no excessive parameters, logical hierarchy | Medium | | Redirect chains | No chains longer than 2 hops, no redirect loops | High | | 404 pages | Custom 404, no soft 404s, broken internal links | Medium | | Pagination | rel=prev/next or proper infinite scroll handling | Low | | Crawl depth | Important pages within 3 clicks of homepage | Medium |

Scoring formula:

Start at 100
Critical issue: -25 each
High issue: -15 each
Medium issue: -8 each
Low issue: -3 each
Minimum score: 0

Category 2: Technical Foundations (Weight: 25%)

| Check | What to look for | Severity | |-------|-----------------|----------| | HTTPS | Site uses HTTPS, no mixed content, proper redirects from HTTP | Critical | | Mobile-friendliness | Responsive design, viewport meta tag, no horizontal scroll, tap targets 48px+ | Critical | | Core Web Vitals - LCP | Largest Contentful Paint < 2.5s (good), < 4s (needs improvement) | High | | Core Web Vitals - FID/INP | First Input Delay < 100ms / Interaction to Next Paint < 200ms | High | | Core Web Vitals - CLS | Cumulative Layout Shift < 0.1 (good), < 0.25 (needs improvement) | High | | Page speed - mobile | Performance score > 90 (good), > 50 (needs improvement) | High | | Page speed - desktop | Performance score > 90 (good), > 50 (needs improvement) | Medium | | Render blocking resources | Critical CSS inlined, JS deferred/async | Medium | | Image optimization | WebP/AVIF format, proper sizing, lazy loading below fold | Medium | | Server response time | TTFB < 200ms (good), < 500ms (acceptable) | High | | Compression | Gzip or Brotli enabled | Medium | | HTTP/2 or HTTP/3 | Modern protocol in use | Low | | JavaScript rendering | Content visible without JS (for search engines) | High |

Scoring: Same formula as Category 1.

Category 3: On-Page Optimization (Weight: 25%)

For each page analyzed, check:

| Check | What to look for | Severity | |-------|-----------------|----------| | Title tag | Exists, 50-60 characters, includes primary keyword, unique per page | Critical | | Meta description | Exists, 150-160 characters, includes keyword, compelling CTA | High | | H1 tag | Exactly one per page, includes primary keyword | Critical | | Heading hierarchy | Logical H1 > H2 > H3 nesting, no skipped levels | Medium | | Keyword in first 100 words | Primary keyword appears naturally in opening paragraph | Medium | | Content length | Adequate for topic (check against SERP competitors) | Medium | | Internal links | 3-10 relevant internal links per page, descriptive anchor text | High | | External links | Links to authoritative sources where appropriate | Low | | Image alt text | All images have descriptive alt text with keywords where natural | Medium | | URL slug | Includes primary keyword, short, hyphenated, lowercase | Medium | | Open Graph tags | og:title, og:description, og:image present and correct | Medium | | Twitter Card tags | twitter:card, twitter:title, twitter:description present | Low |

Scoring: Same formula as Category 1.

Category 4: Content Quality (Weight: 15%)

Evaluate these qualitative factors:

| Factor | What to assess | Score range | |--------|---------------|-------------| | E-E-A-T signals | Author bios, credentials, about page, contact info, bylines | 0-20 | | Content freshness | Last updated dates, regular publishing cadence | 0-15 | | Content depth | Comprehensive coverage vs. thin content, word count vs. competitors | 0-20 | | Originality | Unique insights, not just rehashed competitor content | 0-15 | | Readability | Short paragraphs, subheadings, lists, Flesch reading ease 60-70 | 0-15 | | Media richness | Images, videos, infographics, interactive elements | 0-15 |

Score: Sum of all factors (max 100).

Category 5: Authority & Links (Weight: 15%)

| Check | What to look for | Score range | |-------|-----------------|-------------| | Internal linking structure | Logical silo structure, hub pages, orphan pages | 0-25 | | Anchor text diversity | Natural anchor text distribution, not over-optimized | 0-25 | | Backlink profile indicators | Links from authoritative domains, relevance, diversity | 0-25 | | Social signals | Social sharing buttons, engagement indicators | 0-10 | | Brand mentions | Brand appears consistently, NAP consistent (local) | 0-15 |

Score: Sum of all factors (max 100).

Step 3: Calculate Overall Score

Overall = (Crawlability * 0.20) + (Technical * 0.25) + (On-Page * 0.25) + (Content * 0.15) + (Authority * 0.15)

Rating scale:

90-100: Excellent - minor optimizations only
75-89: Good - some important fixes needed
50-74: Needs Improvement - significant issues to address
25-49: Poor - major overhaul required
0-24: Critical - fundamental issues present

Step 4: Output Report

Format the report exactly as follows:

# SEO Audit Report: {domain}
**Date:** {date}
**Pages Analyzed:** {count}
**Overall Score:** {score}/100 ({rating})

## Score Summary

| Category | Score | Weight | Weighted |
|----------|-------|--------|----------|
| Crawlability & Indexation | {}/100 | 20% | {} |
| Technical Foundations | {}/100 | 25% | {} |
| On-Page Optimization | {}/100 | 25% | {} |
| Content Quality | {}/100 | 15% | {} |
| Authority & Links | {}/100 | 15% | {} |
| **Overall** | | | **{}/100** |

## Critical Issues (Fix Immediately)

1. **{Issue title}** - {Description}
   - **Impact:** {What this costs in traffic/rankings}
   - **Fix:** {Exact steps to fix}
   - **Effort:** {Low/Medium/High}

## High Priority Issues

{Same format as critical}

## Medium Priority Issues

{Same format}

## Low Priority Issues

{Same format}

## Quick Wins (High Impact, Low Effort)

{Numbered list of easy fixes with the biggest impact}

## Detailed Findings

### Crawlability & Indexation
{Detailed findings with evidence}

### Technical Foundations
{Detailed findings with PageSpeed data}

### On-Page Optimization
{Detailed findings per page}

### Content Quality
{Detailed assessment}

### Authority & Links
{Detailed findings}

## Recommended Action Plan

### Week 1: Critical Fixes
{List}

### Week 2-3: High Priority
{List}

### Month 2: Medium Priority
{List}

### Ongoing: Monitoring
{List}

Important Notes

Always be specific. Instead of "improve page speed", say "compress hero image from 2.4MB to ~200KB using WebP format".
Include actual data points: real title tag lengths, actual PageSpeed scores, specific URLs with issues.
If you cannot access a resource (blocked by robots.txt, auth required), note it explicitly.
Compare findings against the site's top 3 competitors when possible.
For Next.js sites, provide code-level fix suggestions (e.g., specific component changes, next.config.js updates).
Never fabricate metrics. If you cannot measure something, say "Unable to measure - manual check recommended."

SEO Audit Skill

Audit Process

Step 1: Gather Data

Use the available tools to collect information about the target site:

Fetch the page using WebFetch to get the HTML content
Check robots.txt at {domain}/robots.txt
Check sitemap at {domain}/sitemap.xml (also check robots.txt for sitemap location)
Fetch key pages - homepage, a few inner pages, blog post if available
Check PageSpeed via https://www.googleapis.com/pagespeedonline/v5/runPagespeed?url={URL}&strategy=mobile and &strategy=desktop

If the user provides a project codebase, also inspect:

Next.js next.config.js, app/layout.tsx, middleware.ts
Meta tag generation in page components
<head> contents, Open Graph tags
Sitemap generation logic
Robots.txt file

Step 2: Audit Categories

Evaluate each category below. Score each 0-100 and list specific issues found.

Category 1: Crawlability & Indexation (Weight: 20%)

Check these items:

Scoring formula:

Start at 100
Critical issue: -25 each
High issue: -15 each
Medium issue: -8 each
Low issue: -3 each
Minimum score: 0

Category 2: Technical Foundations (Weight: 25%)

Scoring: Same formula as Category 1.

Category 3: On-Page Optimization (Weight: 25%)

For each page analyzed, check:

Scoring: Same formula as Category 1.

Category 4: Content Quality (Weight: 15%)

Evaluate these qualitative factors:

Score: Sum of all factors (max 100).

Category 5: Authority & Links (Weight: 15%)

Score: Sum of all factors (max 100).

Step 3: Calculate Overall Score

Overall = (Crawlability * 0.20) + (Technical * 0.25) + (On-Page * 0.25) + (Content * 0.15) + (Authority * 0.15)

Rating scale:

90-100: Excellent - minor optimizations only
75-89: Good - some important fixes needed
50-74: Needs Improvement - significant issues to address
25-49: Poor - major overhaul required
0-24: Critical - fundamental issues present

Step 4: Output Report

Format the report exactly as follows:

# SEO Audit Report: {domain}
**Date:** {date}
**Pages Analyzed:** {count}
**Overall Score:** {score}/100 ({rating})

## Score Summary

| Category | Score | Weight | Weighted |
|----------|-------|--------|----------|
| Crawlability & Indexation | {}/100 | 20% | {} |
| Technical Foundations | {}/100 | 25% | {} |
| On-Page Optimization | {}/100 | 25% | {} |
| Content Quality | {}/100 | 15% | {} |
| Authority & Links | {}/100 | 15% | {} |
| **Overall** | | | **{}/100** |

## Critical Issues (Fix Immediately)

1. **{Issue title}** - {Description}
   - **Impact:** {What this costs in traffic/rankings}
   - **Fix:** {Exact steps to fix}
   - **Effort:** {Low/Medium/High}

## High Priority Issues

{Same format as critical}

## Medium Priority Issues

{Same format}

## Low Priority Issues

{Same format}

## Quick Wins (High Impact, Low Effort)

{Numbered list of easy fixes with the biggest impact}

## Detailed Findings

### Crawlability & Indexation
{Detailed findings with evidence}

### Technical Foundations
{Detailed findings with PageSpeed data}

### On-Page Optimization
{Detailed findings per page}

### Content Quality
{Detailed assessment}

### Authority & Links
{Detailed findings}

## Recommended Action Plan

### Week 1: Critical Fixes
{List}

### Week 2-3: High Priority
{List}

### Month 2: Medium Priority
{List}

### Ongoing: Monitoring
{List}

Important Notes

Always be specific. Instead of "improve page speed", say "compress hero image from 2.4MB to ~200KB using WebP format".
Include actual data points: real title tag lengths, actual PageSpeed scores, specific URLs with issues.
If you cannot access a resource (blocked by robots.txt, auth required), note it explicitly.
Compare findings against the site's top 3 competitors when possible.
For Next.js sites, provide code-level fix suggestions (e.g., specific component changes, next.config.js updates).
Never fabricate metrics. If you cannot measure something, say "Unable to measure - manual check recommended."

Adoption

OpenClaudia/seo-audit

$ install --global

Security Scan Results

SKILL.md

SEO Audit Skill

Audit Process

Step 1: Gather Data

Step 2: Audit Categories

Category 1: Crawlability & Indexation (Weight: 20%)

Category 2: Technical Foundations (Weight: 25%)

Category 3: On-Page Optimization (Weight: 25%)

Category 4: Content Quality (Weight: 15%)

Category 5: Authority & Links (Weight: 15%)

Step 3: Calculate Overall Score

Step 4: Output Report

Important Notes

Related Skills

OpenClaudia/generate-image

OpenClaudia/similarweb-traffic

OpenClaudia/geo-query-finder

OpenClaudia/podcast-edit

OpenClaudia/seo-audit

$ install --global

Security Scan Results

SKILL.md

SEO Audit Skill

Audit Process

Step 1: Gather Data

Step 2: Audit Categories

Category 1: Crawlability & Indexation (Weight: 20%)

Category 2: Technical Foundations (Weight: 25%)

Category 3: On-Page Optimization (Weight: 25%)

Category 4: Content Quality (Weight: 15%)

Category 5: Authority & Links (Weight: 15%)

Step 3: Calculate Overall Score

Step 4: Output Report

Important Notes

Related Skills

OpenClaudia/generate-image

OpenClaudia/similarweb-traffic

OpenClaudia/geo-query-finder

OpenClaudia/podcast-edit