seo-audit
When the user wants to audit, review, or diagnose SEO issues on their site. Also use when the user mentions "SEO audit," "technical SEO," "why am I not ranking," "SEO issues," "on-page SEO," "meta tags review," or "SEO health check." For building pages at scale to target keywords, see programmatic-seo. For adding structured data, see schema-markup.
72
62%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
88%
1.06xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/seo-audit/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
89%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a strong skill description with excellent trigger term coverage and clear differentiation from related skills. The cross-references to programmatic-seo and schema-markup are a notable strength. The main weakness is that the 'what' portion could be more specific about the concrete actions performed (e.g., checking meta tags, analyzing page structure, reviewing crawl errors).
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete actions to the 'what' portion, e.g., 'Audits meta tags, checks page structure, analyzes crawlability, reviews internal linking, and identifies on-page SEO issues.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names the domain (SEO) and some actions ('audit, review, or diagnose SEO issues'), but does not list multiple specific concrete actions like checking meta tags, analyzing page speed, reviewing crawlability, etc. The actions remain somewhat high-level. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (audit, review, diagnose SEO issues) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when' equivalent with detailed trigger terms). Also includes helpful cross-references to related skills (programmatic-seo, schema-markup) to reduce confusion. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would say: 'SEO audit,' 'technical SEO,' 'why am I not ranking,' 'SEO issues,' 'on-page SEO,' 'meta tags review,' 'SEO health check.' The phrase 'why am I not ranking' is particularly good as a natural user query. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description carves out a clear niche (SEO auditing/diagnosis) and explicitly differentiates itself from related skills like programmatic-seo and schema-markup, significantly reducing conflict risk. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
35%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill reads more like a comprehensive SEO audit textbook than a concise skill file for Claude. It contains extensive checklist content that Claude would already know as an SEO expert, inflating the token cost significantly. While the structure and priority ordering are reasonable, the lack of executable examples, validation steps, and proper content splitting into reference files limits its effectiveness.
Suggestions
Reduce the content by 60-70% by removing checklist items Claude already knows (e.g., basic meta description best practices, URL structure rules, E-E-A-T definitions) and focus only on project-specific conventions or non-obvious guidance.
Move the detailed audit checklists (Technical SEO, On-Page SEO, Content Quality, Common Issues by Site Type) into separate reference files and link to them from the main SKILL.md.
Add concrete, executable examples such as a sample audit output for a specific page, a bash command to check robots.txt, or a script snippet to validate sitemap URLs.
Add validation checkpoints to the workflow, such as 'Verify findings against Search Console data before reporting' or 'Cross-check duplicate content claims with canonical tag analysis.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is extremely verbose at ~300+ lines, largely consisting of checklist items that Claude already knows as an SEO expert. Sections like 'What is E-E-A-T,' common meta description issues, and basic URL structure advice are standard SEO knowledge that don't need to be spelled out. Much of this reads like an SEO textbook rather than a concise skill file. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides structured checklists and specific metrics (e.g., LCP < 2.5s, CLS < 0.1), but lacks executable code, commands, or concrete examples of actual audit outputs. It describes what to check rather than providing copy-paste ready commands or scripts to perform the checks. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is a clear priority order (Crawlability → Technical → On-Page → Content → Authority) and an output format structure, but there are no validation checkpoints or feedback loops. For an audit that could produce incorrect recommendations, there's no step to verify findings before presenting them or cross-check issues. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill references two external files (ai-writing-detection.md, aeo-geo-patterns.md) and links to related skills, which is good. However, the massive amount of inline checklist content (technical SEO, on-page SEO, content quality, site-type issues) should be split into separate reference files rather than being included in the main SKILL.md. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- tibelf/ai_project_init
- Commit
56f4516
- 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.