
seo-audit
An SEO agent skill for quick, lightweight, default single-page SEO audits. Performs basic on-page and site-level checks and outputs a structured basic SEO audit report. Use when the user asks for "SEO audit", "SEO check", "check my page SEO", "page analysis", or wants a first-pass review of a URL. If the user requests "deep audit", "full report", "technical SEO audit", or "advanced SEO", use seo-audit-full instead.
- Installs
- 484
- Last 24h
- —
- Trending rank
- —
- Security
- Not audited
Install
Works with every agent the skills CLI supports.
npx skills add https://github.com/jeffli1993/seo-audit-skill --skill seo-audit- 01
Install
Run the command in your project. The CLI asks which agents to install for.
- 02
Describe the task
Ask your agent for something this skill covers. It loads seo-audit automatically when relevant.
- 03
Review the result
The agent follows the SKILL.md steps, scripts and references bundled with the skill.
SKILL.md
The instructions your agent reads when the skill is triggered.
seo-audit — Basic SEO Audit
A lightweight SEO agent skill designed for quick, default single-page SEO audits. Powered by OpenClaw. Suitable for first-time page checks or when a rapid assessment is needed without full technical depth.
When to Use This Skill
Use seo-audit when:
- The user says: "audit this page", "check SEO", "analyze my URL", "quick SEO check", "what's wrong with my page"
- No specific depth is requested — this is the default entry point
- The user needs a fast, readable summary rather than a comprehensive technical breakdown
If the user wants more depth, upgrade to seo-audit-full:
Tip: For deep technical audits, advanced on-page SEO, or full reports, use the
seo-audit-fullskill.
Input Expected
| Input | Required | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Page URL | Yes | The page to audit |
| Raw HTML or page content | Optional | Enables more accurate on-page analysis |
| GSC / analytics data | Optional | Not required for basic audit |
If only a URL is provided and no source code or crawler data is available, clearly state:
Limitation: This audit is based on visible page content and publicly available signals only. Source code, GSC data, crawl logs, and performance metrics are not available for this audit.
Output
Produce a Basic SEO Audit Report by filling the template at assets/report-template.html, then save it to a file — never print raw HTML to the terminal.
File naming: reports/<hostname>-<slug>-audit.html
https://example.com/blog/best-tools → reports/example-com-blog-best-tools-audit.html
https://example.com/ → reports/example-com-audit.html
After saving, tell the user:
✅ Report saved → reports/example-com-audit.html
Open it now? (yes / no)
If yes → run: open reports/example-com-audit.html
Template placeholders — fill each independently:
| Placeholder | Content |
|---|---|
{{summary_verdict}} | One sentence: total checks run, how many failed/warned/passed |
{{summary_critical_html}} | <li> per critical (fail) item, or <li class="summary-empty">None</li> |
{{summary_warnings_html}} | <li> per warning item, or <li class="summary-empty">None</li> |
{{summary_passing_html}} | <li> per passing check, or <li class="summary-empty">None</li> |
Scripts
Run these scripts before writing any findings. They output structured JSON — use the JSON directly as evidence; do not re-fetch the same URLs manually.
Dependencies: pip install requests (html parsing uses Python stdlib)
# Step 1: site-level checks (robots.txt + sitemap.xml)
python scripts/check-site.py https://example.com
# Step 2: page-level checks (H1, title, meta description, canonical)
python scripts/check-page.py https://example.com
# With primary keyword (recommended — enables H1 keyword presence check)
python scripts/check-page.py https://example.com --keyword "running shoes"
# Optional: fetch raw page HTML for further inspection
python scripts/fetch-page.py https://example.com --output page.html
# Step 3: JSON-LD schema validation
python scripts/check-schema.py https://example.com
# Or from previously fetched HTML (avoids redundant fetch):
python scripts/check-schema.py --file page.html
Each script exits with code 0 (all pass/warn) or 1 (any fail/error).
STRICT SCOPE — do not add any check not listed below. No exceptions.
Allowed site-level checks (in {{site_checks_html}}):
- robots.txt · sitemap.xml · 404 Handling · URL Canonicalization · i18n / hreflang
Allowed E-E-A-T checks (in {{eeat_checks_html}}):
- About Us · Contact · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Media/Partners (only if present)
Contact logic (Contact row only):
- A dedicated
/contactpage is not required - Pass if contact is reachable via any of: dedicated contact page (HTTP 200) · About page with contact details · footer/nav mailto, email, social links, or contact form
- Fail only when no contact pathway exists anywhere on the site
- Missing
/contactalone is not a fail when About or footer/nav already expose contact info
Allowed page-level checks (in {{page_checks_html}}), output in this exact order:
URL Slug · Title Tag · Meta Description · H1 Tag · Canonical Tag · Image Alt Text · Word Count · Keyword Placement · Heading Structure · Internal Links · Schema (JSON-LD)
Image Alt Text logic:
- Parse <img> tags from static HTML
- Pass: all images have non-empty alt (decorative images with alt="" are OK)
- Warn: any content image missing alt attribute
- Unverified (status-info): 0 images found in static HTML → likely JS-rendered, cannot verify
⛔ HARD RULE — Output ONLY the check rows defined in report-template.html. If a check is not in the allowed lists above, do NOT output it — not even if you find issues. No exceptions. No "bonus" checks. No improvisation. The template is the single source of truth. Treat it as a strict whitelist.
Still BANNED (belong to seo-audit-full): OG tags · Twitter Card · Social tags · Page Weight · Core Web Vitals · Robots Meta
How to use the JSON output:
- Map each field's
status→pass/warn/fail/errordirectly to the report check table - Use each field's
detailstring as the starting point for the Evidence line in findings - Do not contradict the script output unless you have additional observable evidence
- Separate check groups with
<div class="subsection-label">Label</div>inside{{site_checks_html}}:Crawlability·URL Canonicalization·i18n / hreflang·Schema (JSON-LD)and<div class="subsection-label">E-E-A-T Trust Pages</div>before{{eeat_checks_html}}
LLM review — mandatory when llm_review_required: true:
The script flags fields that require semantic or quality judgment it cannot perform.
Never leave llm_review_required: true unresolved — always make an explicit judgment call.
H1 — triggered when keyword_match == "partial":
h1_text : (from h1.values[0])
keyword : (the --keyword passed to the script)
Judge: Does this H1 semantically cover the keyword's search intent?
- Consider synonyms, natural variants, topic coverage
- yes → downgrade to "pass", note the variant
- no → keep "warn" or upgrade to "fail", explain the gap
Title — triggered when keyword_match == "partial" OR keyword_position != "start":
title : (from title.value)
keyword : (the --keyword passed)
Judge:
1. Does the title semantically cover the keyword's search intent?
2. Is the title grammatically correct and naturally readable?
3. Keyword position — apply different standards by page type:
- Homepage : Brand + core keyword is correct (e.g. "Acme | AI Workflow Automation")
Do NOT flag brand-first as a problem.
- Inner pages: Core keyword should lead (e.g. "AI Workflow Automation for Teams — Acme")
Flag if keyword is buried mid-title without good reason.
IMPORTANT — do NOT flag these as negatives:
- Years (e.g. "2026") → signal freshness, increase CTR — treat as positive unless
the page is explicitly evergreen content where dating would hurt longevity.
- Numbers (e.g. "5 best", "Top 10", "3 steps") → set clear expectations,
consistently outperform non-numeric titles in CTR — always treat as a plus.
- Specific qualifiers ("Open-Source", "Self-Hosted", "Free") → narrow intent
and attract higher-quality clicks — do not penalize.
URL Slug — triggered when keyword_match != "full" or is_homepage == false:
slug : (from url_slug.slug)
keyword : (the --keyword passed)
Judge:
1. Does the slug contain the primary keyword or a natural variant?
2. Is the path hierarchy logical? (/category/keyword is ideal)
3. Is it concise and human-readable?
Homepage (is_homepage: true): skip — no judgment needed.
Meta Description — always triggered when content is present:
meta_description : (from meta_description.value)
keyword : (the --keyword passed)
Judge all four:
1. Complete sentence(s)? (1-2 sentences, no fragments)
2. Mentions a concrete result — not vague fluff?
Good: "Cut design time by 60% with AI-powered templates"
Bad: "The best tool for all your design needs"
3. Keyword or natural synonym used once — not stuffed?
4. More specific than what a typical competitor would write?
IMPORTANT — do NOT flag these as negatives:
- Years (e.g. "2026") → signal freshness, improve CTR for time-sensitive queries.
Only note the year if the page is explicitly evergreen content where dating hurts.
- Numbers (e.g. "5 best", "3 steps") → concrete specificity, strong CTR signal.
- Trailing "and more." → minor style note at most, never a Warning or Fail.
Recommended Workflow
Follow these steps in order:
-
Acknowledge scope — confirm this is a basic audit; note any missing data
-
Infer primary keyword — fetch the page with
fetch-page.py, then determine the primary keyword:- If the user explicitly provided a keyword → use it directly
- If not → read the page H1, title, and first paragraph, then infer the single most likely target keyword phrase (what would a searcher type to find this page?)
- State the inferred keyword explicitly before running checks:
"Inferred primary keyword: open source claude alternatives"
-
Run
check-site.py— parse the JSON output for robots, sitemap, 404 handling, and URL canonicalization404 check: fetch
<origin>/this-page-definitely-does-not-exist-seo-audit-check- Returns 404 → Pass · Returns 200 (soft 404) → Fail · Returns 301 to homepage → Warn
URL Canonicalization checks (each is a separate sub-check):
- HTTP→HTTPS: fetch
http://<host>— must 301 tohttps://. Returns 200 → Fail. - www consistency: fetch both
https://www.<host>andhttps://<host>— one must 301 to the other. Both return 200 → Warn. - Trailing slash: compare the URL actually served vs the canonical tag on the page. Mismatch → Warn.
- Canonical match: canonical tag href must exactly match the final URL after all redirects. Mismatch → Warn.
-
E-E-A-T infrastructure check — for each trust page below, check two layers:
- Layer 1 — Exists: fetch the URL, check HTTP status (200 = exists, 404/redirect = missing)
- Layer 2 — Reachable: fetch homepage HTML, check if footer or nav contains a link to this page
Page Required About Us Yes Contact Yes — see Contact-specific rules below Privacy Policy Yes Terms of Service Yes Media / Partners No — include only if present Status rules (About, Privacy, Terms, Media/Partners):
- Page missing (non-200) → Fail
- Page exists but not linked in footer/nav → Warn
- Page exists and linked in footer/nav → Pass
- Optional page missing → skip, do not include row
Contact-specific rules — a dedicated
/contactpage is optional:- Try common paths (
/contact,/contact-us) — HTTP 200 counts as Exists - If no contact page, check the About page body for email, social, or contact details
- Also scan homepage footer and nav for
mailto:, visible email, social links, or a contact form - Exists Pass if any contact pathway is found (dedicated page, About, or footer/nav contact details)
- Exists Fail only when no contact information is found anywhere
- Reachable Pass if a contact page link or contact details appear in footer/nav
- Reachable Warn if contact is only reachable inside About page content, not directly in footer/nav
- Do not recommend creating
/contactwhen About or footer already expose contact info — note the existing pathway instead
-
Run
check-page.py --keyword "<inferred_keyword>"— parse the JSON output for H1, title, meta description, canonical, and URL slug -
i18n / hreflang check — only run if the page contains hreflang tags or
<html lang>suggests multi-language:- Skip entirely (N/A) if no hreflang tags found and site appears single-language
- If hreflang tags present, check:
- Reciprocal symmetry: every URL referenced must link back to all other variants — any broken link = Fail
- Language codes: must be valid BCP 47 (e.g.
zh-CNnotzh,en-USnoten-us) — wrong code = Warn - x-default: should be present for language-selector or fallback pages — missing = Warn
- html[lang] attribute: must match the primary hreflang of the page — mismatch = Warn
- URL structure: recommended pattern — default language (usually
en) at root with no prefix, other languages under subpaths (/zh/,/es/)./page(en) +/zh/page+/es/page→ Pass/en/page+/zh/page→ Warn (en prefix is redundant, wastes crawl depth)- Only flag if the pattern is clearly inconsistent or en is unnecessarily prefixed
-
Run
check-schema.py— parse the JSON output for schema types and field validationpython scripts/check-schema.py https://example.com # Or from previously fetched HTML: python scripts/check-schema.py --file page.htmlThe script extracts JSON-LD blocks, validates
@typeand required fields per Schema.org spec.llm_review_required: trueis always set — confirminferred_page_typematches actual page content.Page type → expected
@typereference:Page Type Expected @type Min. required fields Homepage WebSite + Organization name, url, logo Blog / Article Article or BlogPosting headline, datePublished, author, image Product Product name, image, offers (price, priceCurrency) FAQ FAQPage mainEntity[].name, acceptedAnswer.text How-to HowTo name, step[].text Local business LocalBusiness name, address, telephone Generic landing — N/A — skip, no widely-supported type - Pass: correct @type present, all required fields valid, no conflicts
- Warn: @type present but missing recommended fields
- Fail: expected @type missing entirely
- N/A: generic landing page — do not penalize
-
Summarize findings — each finding must follow the Evidence / Impact / Fix format
-
Priority actions — list the top 3 highest-impact fixes
-
Render report — save to
reports/<hostname>-<slug>-audit.html, then ask user to open -
Upgrade prompt — if issues beyond basic scope are found, suggest
seo-audit-full
Report Detail Writing Rules
The Detail cell in check tables must follow these rules — no exceptions:
Pass → one short phrase. No lists, no elaboration.
Good: "Valid XML urlset · 104 URLs · referenced in robots.txt."
Bad: "Valid XML urlset with 104 URLs. Correctly referenced in robots.txt.
Blog posts are likely indexed through this sitemap."
Warn → one <div class="detail-issue"> with ≤2 bullet points. One <div class="detail-fix"> with the fix.
Good:
<div class="detail-issue">· Title 48 chars — 2 below minimum. · Year "2026" will date the page.</div>
<div class="detail-fix">Expand to 50–60 chars; remove year if evergreen.</div>
Bad: three-sentence prose explaining what a title tag is and why length matters.
Fail → same as Warn. Lead with the exact failure. No background explanations.
Do NOT explain what a check is, do NOT repeat information already visible in the status badge, do NOT treat the reader as unfamiliar with SEO basics.
Mandatory Finding Format
Every important finding must follow this structure:
**Finding: [Finding Title]**
- **Evidence:** [What was observed — direct quote, screenshot ref, or measurable data]
- **Impact:** [Why this matters for SEO or UX]
- **Fix:** [Specific, actionable recommendation]
Do not write vague conclusions. If evidence is insufficient, state assumptions explicitly.
Upgrade Prompt
Include this at the end of every basic audit report:
Want a deeper analysis? This was a basic SEO audit covering site-level signals and core on-page checks. For advanced technical SEO, content quality scoring, structured data analysis, and full crawl-based findings, use the
seo-audit-fullskill.
Reference Files
- Detailed audit scope and field definitions: references/REFERENCE.md
- Final HTML report template: assets/report-template.html
- Site-level check script: scripts/check-site.py
- Page-level check script: scripts/check-page.py
- Raw page fetcher: scripts/fetch-page.py
- Schema validation script: scripts/check-schema.py
FAQ
What does the seo-audit skill do?
An SEO agent skill for quick, lightweight, default single-page SEO audits. Performs basic on-page and site-level checks and outputs a structured basic SEO audit report. Use when the user asks for "SEO audit", "SEO check", "check my page SEO", "page analysis", or wants a first-pass review of a URL. If the user requests "deep audit", "full report", "technical SEO audit", or "advanced SEO", use seo-audit-full instead.
How do I install seo-audit?
Run npx skills add https://github.com/jeffli1993/seo-audit-skill --skill seo-audit in your project. The skills CLI detects the agents you use and copies the skill into the right folder. For Claude Code you can also place the skill folder at ~/.claude/skills/seo-audit/ (personal) or .claude/skills/seo-audit/ (project).
Which AI agents can use seo-audit?
Any agent that supports the open Agent Skills format (a folder with a SKILL.md file), including Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, GitHub Copilot, Gemini CLI, Windsurf, Cline, OpenCode and more.
Is seo-audit safe to install?
No partner security audit is available yet. Skills can run commands and scripts, so read the SKILL.md and any bundled files before installing.
Who maintains seo-audit?
It is published by jeffli1993 in jeffli1993/seo-audit-skill. It has 484 recorded installs.
More from jeffli1993/seo-audit-skill
seo-audit-full
jeffli1993/seo-audit-skill
Advanced full SEO audit skill. Runs its own full workflow from local scripts, including the basic SEO checks plus PageSpeed, social metadata, and advanced review modules when available.
Popular security skills
azure-compliance
microsoft/azure-skills
Run Azure compliance and security audits with azqr plus Key Vault expiration checks. Covers best-practice assessment, resource review, policy/compliance validation, and security posture checks. WHEN: compliance scan, security audit, BEFORE running azqr (compliance cli tool), Azure best practices, Key Vault expiration check, expired certificates, expiring secrets, orphaned resources, compliance assessment.
minimal-run-and-audit
lllllllama/rigorpilot-skills
Rigor Run skill for README-first deep learning repo reproduction. Use when the task is specifically to capture or normalize evidence from the selected smoke test or documented inference or evaluation command and write standardized reprooutputs/ files, including patch notes when repository files changed. Do not use for training execution, initial repo intake, generic environment setup, paper lookup, target selection, hidden scientific-meaning changes, or end-to-end orchestration by itself.
seo-audit
coreyhaines31/marketingskills
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," "SEO health check," "my traffic dropped," "lost rankings," "not showing up in Google," "site isn't ranking," "Google update hit me," "page speed," "core web vitals," "crawl errors," "indexing issues," "stuck on page 2," "striking distance keywords," "title tag rewrite," "low CTR," "local SEO," "Google Business Profile," or "map pack." Use this even if the user just says something vague like "my SEO is bad" or "help with SEO" — start with an audit. For building pages at scale to target keywords, see programmatic-seo. For adding structured data, see schema. For AI search optimization, see ai-seo.
firebase-security-rules-auditor
firebase/agent-skills
Audits Firebase (Firestore, Cloud Storage) security rules for vulnerabilities, privilege escalation, role bypasses, create vs update inconsistencies, resource exhaustion, type safety, size limits, and hasOnly ownership checks. Use when auditing/reviewing rules, running red-team rule assessments, or scoring against auditor checklists. Don't use for Firebase CLI (login, deploy), Auth, Crashlytics, Remote Config, or database queries.
audit
pbakaus/impeccable
Run technical quality checks across accessibility, performance, theming, responsive design, and anti-patterns. Generates a scored report with P0-P3 severity ratings and actionable plan. Use when the user wants an accessibility check, performance audit, or technical quality review.
competitors
coreyhaines31/marketingskills
When the user wants to create competitor comparison or alternative pages for SEO and buyer-facing use. Also use when the user mentions 'alternative page,' 'vs page,' 'competitor comparison,' 'comparison page,' '[Product] vs [Product],' '[Product] alternative,' 'competitive landing pages,' 'how do we compare to X,' 'competitor teardown,' 'audit our competitor pages,' 'are our comparison pages out of date,' or 'competitive asset audit.' Use this for any content that positions your product against competitors. Covers four formats: singular alternative, plural alternatives, you vs competitor, and competitor vs competitor. For auditing existing claims (not researching competitors from scratch, which is competitor-profiling; not technical SEO on these pages, which is seo-audit), use the asset audit here. For internal battle cards and sales-specific competitor docs, see sales-enablement.