CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

local-legal-seo-audit

Audit and improve local SEO for law firms, attorneys, forensic experts and legal/professional services sites with local presence, focusing on GBP, directories, E-E-A-T and practice/location pages.

59

Quality

68%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/local-legal-seo-audit/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is local-legal-seo-audit in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

71%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.

A well-structured, actionable audit playbook with a clear prioritized workflow and concrete per-section checklists, though it is a long monolithic document that does not exploit progressive disclosure via separate reference files.

Suggestions

Move the long directory/citation lists and FAQ example phrasings into a references file (e.g., references/directories.md) and link to it from the body to improve progressive disclosure.

Add an explicit "verify findings against the site/GPB before drafting the report" checkpoint in the Output Format section to push workflow clarity toward 5.

Trim explanatory asides (e.g., restating that legal is YMYL or that most legal searches happen on mobile) since Claude already knows these concepts.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly lean checklist items that assume Claude's SEO knowledge (e.g., "LCP < 2.5s", "CLS < 0.1", "INP < 200ms") with only minor explanatory prose such as "Legal sites fall under Google's YMYL... E-E-A-T signals are heavily weighted" that could be trimmed, matching the 4 anchor rather than the fully lean 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

It gives concrete, specific guidance throughout — title format "`[Service] in [City] | [Firm Name]`", named directories (OAB, Jusbrasil, Avvo), and per-page checks; as an instruction-only audit skill the absence of code is not penalized, and the guidance is mostly executable with only minor gaps, fitting 4.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear sequence runs from Initial Assessment through a prioritized Audit Framework to a structured Output Format with a Prioritized Action Plan (Critical → High → Quick wins → Long-term); because an audit is read-only and non-destructive the validation cap does not apply, and only the lack of an explicit verify-findings checkpoint keeps it below 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

All ~340 lines live inline in SKILL.md with good section headers but no bundle files to offload reference material (e.g., the directory lists, FAQ examples) into separate one-level-deep files, so content that could be split remains inline — matching the 3 anchor rather than 4.

3 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

66%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.

A specific, well-scoped description for legal local SEO that names concrete focus areas and natural trigger terms, but it omits an explicit "Use when..." clause, which caps its completeness and leaves trigger guidance implicit.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when auditing or improving local SEO for law firms, attorneys, or forensic/professional services sites — not for general SEO health checks."

Swap one broad verb ("audit and improve") for two or three concrete actions (e.g., "audit GBP, optimize practice/location pages, and fix NAP citations") to lift specificity toward 5.

Add a couple of common user phrasings or synonyms (e.g., "lawyer", "local search", "Google Business Profile") to round out trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Quotes "Audit and improve local SEO" with concrete focus areas "GBP, directories, E-E-A-T and practice/location pages" — names the domain plus several specific levers, but the verbs (audit/improve) stay somewhat broad rather than enumerating multiple discrete actions, so it sits below the comprehensive 5 anchor.

4 / 5

Completeness

It clearly states the "what" (audit and improve local SEO for legal/professional services with local presence) but offers no explicit "Use when..." trigger clause, and the rubric caps completeness at 3 when trigger guidance is missing.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms a user would say appear ("local SEO", "law firms", "attorneys", "forensic experts") alongside domain-standard tokens (GBP, E-E-A-T); good coverage with a few common variations missing, fitting the 4 anchor rather than the fully comprehensive 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The legal/professional-services + local-presence scoping carves a clear niche with distinct triggers, but it shares "local SEO / audit" surface with a general seo-audit skill, leaving minor overlap risk consistent with the 4 anchor.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
Reviewed

Table of Contents

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.