fixing-metadata

Audit and fix HTML metadata including page titles, meta descriptions, canonical URLs, Open Graph tags, Twitter cards, favicons, JSON-LD structured data, and robots directives. Use when adding SEO metadata, fixing social share previews, reviewing Open Graph tags, setting up canonical URLs, or shipping new pages that need correct meta tags.

1.00x

Quality

79%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

94%

1.00x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/fixing-metadata/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

75%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-organized, token-efficient checklist skill with concrete rules and a sensible priority-ordered workflow including a verification step. Its main weaknesses are mild redundancy between the Workflow and Review guidance sections and a few under-specified rules that lack concrete numbers or examples.

Suggestions

Remove the '## review guidance' section or fold it into the Workflow, since it restates workflow steps 3-5 almost verbatim and duplicates the priority guidance.

Add concrete specifics to the vague rules: e.g., recommended OG image dimensions (1200x630), title length bounds, and an example of the consistent title format.

Add an explicit feedback loop after the verification step (e.g., 'if a card fails to render, fix the tag and re-verify') to complete the validation cycle.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is a lean bullet-rule checklist that assumes Claude's knowledge (no explaining what Open Graph or canonical URLs are). It is not a 5 because the '## review guidance' section restates workflow steps 3-5 nearly verbatim and '## when to apply' duplicates the description's triggers, so there is minor trimming to be done.	4 / 5
Actionability	Most rules are concrete and checkable ("og:url must match the canonical URL", "set twitter:card appropriately, summary_large_image by default", "use noindex only for private, duplicate, or non-public pages"). It is not a 5 because a handful of bullets are under-specified ("prefer correct image dimensions", "keep titles short and readable" without lengths or ratios).	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The five-step workflow is clearly ordered, sequences by priority ("fix critical issues (duplicates, indexing) first"), and includes a verification checkpoint ("verify social cards render correctly on a real URL, not localhost"). It stops short of the 5 anchor because there is no explicit fix-and-re-verify feedback loop for failed checks.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is well structured with a priority table and consistent category sections, and there are no nested or buried references. It is not a 5 because at ~100 lines it exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill exception, and lower-priority categories (structured data, locale/alternates) could plausibly be split into reference files.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

83%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 strong description that clearly states what the skill does and when to use it, with an explicit 'Use when' clause and a comprehensive enumeration of metadata surfaces. The main limitation is a somewhat narrow action-verb range ('audit and fix') and trigger phrasing that could include more synonym variations.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description lists two concrete actions ("Audit and fix") with a comprehensive enumeration of targets (page titles, canonical URLs, Open Graph tags, Twitter cards, favicons, JSON-LD structured data, robots directives). It fits the 'several specific actions, minor gaps' anchor rather than the 5 anchor, which expects multiple distinct action verbs.	4 / 5
Completeness	It explicitly answers both 'what' ("Audit and fix HTML metadata including...") and 'when' ("Use when adding SEO metadata, fixing social share previews...") with concrete trigger phrases, directly matching the 5 anchor. It is not a 4 because the when-clause is explicit and specific rather than merely present.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural trigger phrases like "adding SEO metadata", "fixing social share previews", "reviewing Open Graph tags", and "setting up canonical URLs" give good keyword coverage. It falls short of the 5 anchor because it lacks synonym/variation spread (e.g., no 'OG tags', 'structured data', or 'SERP'-style variants in the trigger list).	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The HTML/SEO metadata niche is clear with distinct triggers, but phrases like "shipping new pages that need correct meta tags" and "adding SEO metadata" carry minor overlap risk with generic web-development or page-creation skills, matching the 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' anchor rather than the 5 anchor's minimal conflict risk.	4 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: ibelick/ui-skills
Path: skills/fixing-metadata/SKILL.md
Commit: ebf5f26

Reviewed: 1 day 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.