mediar-ai/audit

SEO Audit

Run a comprehensive SEO audit covering technical foundations, on-page optimization, content quality, link profile, and competitive positioning.

Before You Start

Gather this context (ask if not provided):

1. Domain. What site are we auditing?
2. Goals. What are you trying to achieve? (More traffic, better rankings, fix a drop, pre-launch check)
3. Known issues. Anything you already suspect is wrong?
4. Access. Do you have Google Search Console and Google Analytics data? (Improves the audit significantly)
5. Scope. Full audit or focused on a specific area? (If unsure, run the full audit)

Audit Framework

A complete SEO audit covers five layers. Work through them in order — problems in earlier layers undermine everything that follows.

Layer 1: Technical Foundation     ← Can Google crawl and index the site?
Layer 2: On-Page Optimization     ← Are pages optimized for target keywords?
Layer 3: Content Quality          ← Is the content worth ranking?
Layer 4: Link Profile             ← Does the site have authority?
Layer 5: Competitive Position     ← How does the site compare to competitors?

Layer 1: Technical Foundation

Check whether search engines can properly access, crawl, render, and index the site.

Crawlability

• [ ] robots.txt — fetch and review. No critical paths blocked? Sitemap directive present?
• [ ] XML sitemap — exists, valid XML, lists all important pages, excludes noindex/redirected pages?
• [ ] Site architecture — important pages reachable within 3 clicks from homepage?
• [ ] Orphan pages — any pages with zero internal links pointing to them?
• [ ] Redirect chains — any paths with 2+ redirects in sequence?
• [ ] HTTP status — all important pages return 200? No unexpected 301s, 404s, or soft 404s?

Indexability

• [ ] noindex tags — any important pages accidentally noindexed?
• [ ] Canonical tags — self-referencing on all pages? No conflicting canonicals?
• [ ] Duplicate content — same content accessible at multiple URLs (www/non-www, HTTP/HTTPS, trailing slash)?
• [ ] Search Console index coverage — how many pages submitted vs indexed? Any excluded pages that should be indexed?

Performance

• [ ] Core Web Vitals — LCP < 2.5s, CLS < 0.1, INP < 200ms?
• [ ] TTFB — < 800ms from major regions?
• [ ] Mobile-friendly — passes Google's mobile usability tests?
• [ ] HTTPS — enforced across the entire site? Valid certificate?

Rendering

• [ ] JavaScript-dependent content — is critical content in the initial HTML or loaded via JS?
• [ ] Content visibility — can search engines see the full page content?

Layer 2: On-Page Optimization

Check whether individual pages are properly optimized for their target keywords.

Title Tags

• [ ] Every page has a unique <title>
• [ ] Titles include the primary target keyword
• [ ] Titles are under 60 characters (avoid truncation)
• [ ] Titles are descriptive and click-worthy (not keyword-stuffed)

Meta Descriptions

• [ ] Every important page has a unique meta description
• [ ] Descriptions are 150-160 characters
• [ ] Descriptions include a value proposition and call to action

Heading Structure

• [ ] One H1 per page containing the primary keyword
• [ ] Logical heading hierarchy (H1 → H2 → H3, no level skipping)
• [ ] Headings describe section content accurately

URL Structure

• [ ] URLs are clean, readable, and descriptive
• [ ] URLs use hyphens (not underscores)
• [ ] No excessive URL parameters or session IDs in indexed URLs
• [ ] Consistent URL structure across the site

Internal Linking

• [ ] Important pages have sufficient incoming internal links (3+)
• [ ] Anchor text is descriptive and varied (not all "click here")
• [ ] Hub-and-spoke structure exists for topic clusters
• [ ] No broken internal links (404 targets)

Image Optimization

• [ ] All images have descriptive alt attributes
• [ ] Images use modern formats (WebP/AVIF) where supported
• [ ] Images are appropriately sized (not serving 4000px images in 400px containers)
• [ ] Decorative images use empty alt=""

Structured Data

• [ ] Relevant schema markup present (Article, Product, FAQ, LocalBusiness, BreadcrumbList, etc.)
• [ ] Schema validates without errors in Google's Rich Results Test
• [ ] Schema matches visible page content (no hidden/misleading markup)

On-Page Scoring Rubric

For a detailed page-level audit, score each page across 8 sections:

| Section | Weight | What to Score | |---------|--------|--------------| | Title Tag | 15% | Keyword presence, in first half, 50-60 chars, unique, compelling, intent match | | Meta Description | 5% | Keyword included, 150-160 chars, CTA present, unique | | Header Structure | 10% | Single H1 with keyword, logical hierarchy (no skipped levels), H2s cover subtopics | | Content Quality | 25% | Sufficient length, comprehensive, unique value, up-to-date, good formatting, E-E-A-T signals | | Keyword Optimization | 15% | Keyword in title/H1/first 100 words/URL, density 0.5-2.5%, semantic terms present | | Internal/External Links | 10% | Sufficient internal links, descriptive anchors, quality external links, no broken links | | Image Optimization | 10% | Alt text on all images, descriptive filenames, optimized sizes, modern formats | | Page-Level Technical | 10% | Clean URL, correct canonical, mobile-friendly, LCP ≤2.5s, HTTPS, schema present |

Content Length Benchmarks (for full score on "sufficient length"):

| Intent Type | Target Word Count | |------------|------------------| | Informational | 1,500+ words | | Commercial investigation | 1,200+ words | | Transactional | 500+ words | | Local | 400+ words |

Internal Link Count Guidelines:

| Page Length | Target Internal Links | |-----------|---------------------| | <500 words | 2-4 links | | 500-1,000 words | 3-6 links | | 1,000-2,000 words | 5-10 links | | 2,000+ words | 8-15 links |

Keyword density penalties: >3.0% = keyword stuffing (score 0); <0.5% = under-optimized.

Score grade scale:

| Score | Grade | Assessment | |-------|-------|-----------| | 90-100 | A+ | Exceptional — maintain | | 80-89 | A | Strong — minor tweaks | | 70-79 | B | Good — several areas need attention | | 60-69 | C | Average — significant improvements needed | | 50-59 | D | Below average — major issues | | <50 | F | Poor — comprehensive overhaul required |

Layer 3: Content Quality

Evaluate whether the content deserves to rank.

E-E-A-T Assessment

• Experience — Does the content demonstrate first-hand experience with the topic?
• Expertise — Is the content written with subject-matter depth? Does it go beyond surface-level?
• Authoritativeness — Does the site have a reputation in this topic area? Are authors credible?
• Trustworthiness — Are claims sourced? Is the site transparent about who publishes it?

Content Coverage

• [ ] Does each page have a clear target keyword and intent?
• [ ] Is the content comprehensive enough to fully satisfy the search query?
• [ ] Are there thin pages (< 300 words) that should be expanded or consolidated?
• [ ] Is content up to date? Any pages with stale data, broken examples, or outdated advice?

Content Gaps

• [ ] What topics do competitors cover that this site doesn't?
• [ ] Are there keywords with search demand that no existing page targets?
• [ ] Are there topic clusters that are incomplete (pillar page but missing spokes, or vice versa)?

Cannibalization

• [ ] Are multiple pages targeting the same keyword?
• [ ] If so, are they competing against each other in rankings?
• [ ] Resolution: consolidate, differentiate, or canonical the weaker page to the stronger one.

Layer 4: Link Profile

Assess the site's backlink authority and quality.

Backlink Overview

• Total referring domains
• Dofollow vs nofollow ratio
• Link acquisition trend (growing, stable, or declining?)
• Average authority of linking domains

Link Quality

• [ ] Any high-spam-score referring domains that could trigger penalties?
• [ ] Are links contextual (in-content) or low-value (sidebar, footer, comment)?
• [ ] Anchor text distribution — natural diversity or suspicious over-optimization?

Link Gaps

• [ ] Which competitor pages earn the most backlinks? What content type?
• [ ] Are there broken backlinks worth recovering? (404 pages that once had links)
• [ ] Are there linkable assets on the site that aren't being promoted?

Layer 5: Competitive Position

Understand where the site stands relative to competitors.

Keyword Overlap

• Which keywords do you share with competitors?
• Where are you winning vs losing?
• What keywords do competitors rank for that you don't?

Content Comparison

• How does content depth and quality compare to top-ranking competitors?
• What formats are competitors using that you aren't (video, tools, templates)?
• What unique angles or data could differentiate your content?

Authority Comparison

• How does your domain authority/rating compare?
• Do competitors have significantly more referring domains?
• Are there authority-building opportunities you're not pursuing?

Scoring

After completing all layers, assign a health score:

| Layer | Weight | Score (1-10) | Weighted | |-------|--------|-------------|----------| | Technical Foundation | 25% | [score] | [weighted] | | On-Page Optimization | 20% | [score] | [weighted] | | Content Quality | 25% | [score] | [weighted] | | Link Profile | 15% | [score] | [weighted] | | Competitive Position | 15% | [score] | [weighted] | | Overall | 100% | | [total] |

Scoring guide:

• 8-10: Strong — maintain and optimize
• 5-7: Needs work — clear improvement opportunities
• 1-4: Critical — fundamental issues blocking performance

Veto Conditions

These conditions cap the overall score regardless of how well other layers perform. A single veto prevents a site from appearing healthy when it has a fatal flaw:

| Condition | Cap | Rationale | |-----------|-----|-----------| | robots.txt blocks all of Googlebot or blocks / | Overall capped at 1/10 | Nothing else matters if Google can't crawl | | > 20% of important pages have noindex accidentally | Overall capped at 3/10 | Most of the site is invisible to search | | All three Core Web Vitals are "Poor" | Technical capped at 3/10 | Google deprioritizes sites with terrible UX | | Zero external backlinks (entire domain) | Link Profile capped at 2/10 | No external authority signal exists | | Site serves HTTP without redirect to HTTPS | Technical capped at 4/10 | Google requires HTTPS for trust signals | | Google manual action active | Overall capped at 2/10 | Penalty overrides all optimization |

Check veto conditions before scoring layers. If any veto fires, flag it prominently in the executive summary and cap the relevant score.

Output Format

SEO Audit: [domain]

Overall Health Score: [score]/10

Executive Summary 3-5 sentences covering: the site's biggest strength, the most critical issue, and the highest-impact opportunity.

Layer Scores

| Layer | Score | Top Issue | |-------|-------|-----------| | Technical Foundation | [x]/10 | [one-line summary] | | On-Page Optimization | [x]/10 | [one-line summary] | | Content Quality | [x]/10 | [one-line summary] | | Link Profile | [x]/10 | [one-line summary] | | Competitive Position | [x]/10 | [one-line summary] |

Critical Issues (fix immediately)

| Issue | Layer | Affected Pages | Impact | Fix | |-------|-------|---------------|--------|-----| | ... | ... | ... | high | ... |

High-Priority Improvements (fix this month)

| Improvement | Layer | Effort | Expected Impact | |-------------|-------|--------|-----------------| | ... | ... | low/medium/high | ... |

Opportunities (plan for next quarter)

| Opportunity | Layer | Description | |-------------|-------|-------------| | ... | ... | ... |

Detailed Findings [Full findings organized by layer with specific evidence and recommendations]

90-Day Action Plan

Month 1: Fix the foundation

• [Critical technical fixes]
• [Quick on-page wins]

Month 2: Strengthen content

• [Content gaps to fill]
• [Pages to refresh]
• [Internal linking improvements]

Month 3: Build authority

• [Link building priorities]
• [Competitive positioning moves]

---

Pro Tip: Try the free SEO Audit and Domain Authority Checker at seojuice.com for a quick automated baseline. For ongoing monitoring, SEOJuice MCP users can run /seojuice:seo-overview for live health scores with trends, /seojuice:site-health for technical topology, and /seojuice:competitor-analysis for competitive gaps.