domain-authority-auditor

40-item CITE domain audit: citation, impact, trust, entity scoring with veto checks. 域名权威/网站可信度

Quality

63%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.cursor/skills/domain-authority-auditor/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

67%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is a well-structured, actionable audit methodology with concrete scoring rules, weight tables, veto gates, validation checklists, and a bundled worked example. Its main weaknesses are padding from cross-cutting ecosystem boilerplate and a duplicated report template, plus reliance on an external (non-bundled) file for the actual 40 item definitions.

Suggestions

Trim the ecosystem boilerplate block (System Mode/Sister skill/Namespace note/System role) or move it to a shared library reference so the body opens with actionable guidance.

Consolidate the report template shown across Steps 2–4 into a single canonical block to remove overlapping scaffolding.

Bundle the cite-domain-rating.md benchmark locally (or inline the 40 item criteria) so the skill is self-contained without external GitHub fetches.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient and does not explain basic SEO concepts, but it carries noticeable padding: ecosystem boilerplate (Skill Contract/State Model/Sister skill/Namespace note/System role) and a report markdown template shown in pieces across Steps 2, 3, and 4 with overlapping scaffolding that could be tightened.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete scoring scheme (Pass=10/Partial=5/Fail=0), full domain-type weight table, named veto items with actions, the CITE formula, the rating scale, and a complete report template make the methodology executable; the gap is that the 40 per-item criteria live in an external (non-bundled) reference and templates use [specific observation] placeholders.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear four-step sequence (Preparation → C+I → T+E → Scoring & Report → Save) runs the veto emergency-brake first and includes explicit Input/Output Validation checklists; it stops short of anchor 5 because there is no embedded validate→fix→retry feedback loop within the steps.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are well-organized with a Reference Materials list and signaled inline links, and the one bundled reference (example-report.md, one level deep) is real; however the core 40-item benchmark (cite-domain-rating.md) is an external GitHub URL not present in the local bundle, and the ~80-line report template is inlined in Step 4.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

58%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is specific and distinct, naming a clear 40-item CITE audit niche with four scoring dimensions and veto checks, but it omits any explicit 'Use when...' trigger guidance and leans on CITE jargon over the natural English phrases users would say. Completeness and trigger coverage are the main weaknesses.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when auditing domain trust/authority, checking domain credibility, or benchmarking a domain before a GEO campaign.'

Add natural English trigger terms ('domain authority', 'domain rating', 'domain credibility') alongside the CITE jargon and Chinese keywords.

Lead with a verb-driven action statement ('Scores domain authority across 40 CITE criteria...') to push specificity from anchor 4 toward 5.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The phrase 'citation, impact, trust, entity scoring with veto checks' lists several concrete scoring actions across four named dimensions, but they are noun phrases rather than fully elaborated verbs, leaving minor coverage gaps relative to the comprehensive anchor 5.	4 / 5
Completeness	It gives a clear 'what' (40-item CITE domain audit with four scoring dimensions and veto checks) but no 'when' / 'Use when...' clause; per the rubric guideline, a missing explicit trigger clause caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It includes some relevant keywords ('domain audit', 'trust', 'citation') plus multilingual natural terms (域名权威/网站可信度), but relies on 'CITE' jargon and omits common English variations users actually say ('domain authority', 'domain rating', 'is my site trustworthy').	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The 'CITE domain audit' framing with named dimensions and veto checks carves a clear niche, but there is minor overlap risk with closely related sister skills (content-quality-auditor, backlink-analyzer) in the same SEO/GEO library.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Validation

81%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
metadata_field	'metadata' should map string keys to string values	Warning
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning
referenced_paths_exist	Referenced path issues: 3 missing	Warning

	Total	13 / 16 Passed

Repository: MODSetter/SurfSense
Path: .cursor/skills/domain-authority-auditor/SKILL.md
Commit: b4d57e9

Reviewed: 2 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.