seo-content-audit — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited seo-content-audit (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
Professional methodology for comprehensive on-page SEO and content quality analysis.
Title Tag Analysis:
□ Length: 50-60 characters
□ Primary keyword near beginning (first 30 chars)
□ Unique across site
□ Compelling for CTR
□ Brand included (if space)
□ No keyword stuffing
□ Matches search intentMeta Description Analysis:
□ Length: 150-160 characters
□ Contains primary keyword
□ Includes call-to-action
□ Unique across site
□ Accurately describes content
□ Compelling for clicksHeader Structure (H1-H6):
Requirements:
□ Single H1 matching topic
□ H1 contains primary keyword
□ Logical hierarchy (H1 → H2 → H3)
□ No skipped levels
□ Keywords in H2s naturally
□ Descriptive, not genericURL Structure:
□ Clean, descriptive
□ Contains primary keyword
□ Under 60 characters
□ Lowercase with hyphens
□ No parameters or IDs
□ Matches content hierarchyContent Completeness Scoring:
| Factor | Check | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Topic coverage | Comprehensive vs. shallow | /10 |
| Unique value | Original insights vs. rehash | /10 |
| Accuracy | Factual, verifiable | /10 |
| Freshness | Current information | /10 |
| Depth | Expert-level detail | /10 |
The C.R.E.A.T.E. Framework:
| Factor | Question | Score 1-4 |
|---|---|---|
| Comprehensiveness | Does it fully answer the query? | |
| Relevance | Does it match search intent? | |
| Expertise | Does it demonstrate deep knowledge? | |
| Actionability | Can readers apply this immediately? | |
| Trustworthiness | Are claims supported by evidence? | |
| Engagement | Is it interesting to read? |
Readability Standards:
Target reading level: Grade 8-10 (Flesch-Kincaid)
Paragraph length: 2-4 sentences ideal
Sentence variety: Mix short and medium
Scannable formatting: Headers, bullets, bold
Visual aids: Images, tables, diagrams where helpfulPrimary Keyword Checklist:
□ In title tag (first 30 chars)
□ In H1
□ In first 100 words
□ In at least one H2
□ In meta description
□ In URL
□ Natural density: 0.5-1.5%
□ In image alt text (if relevant)Semantic Coverage:
□ LSI keywords present
□ Related entities mentioned
□ Question variations addressed
□ Synonyms used naturally
□ Topic cluster alignment
□ Search intent fully matchedKeyword Density Guidelines:
Primary keyword: 0.5-1.5% density (natural)
Secondary keywords: 0.3-0.8% each
LSI/Related terms: Natural inclusion
Avoid: Keyword stuffing (>2%)Experience Signals:
□ First-hand experience indicated
□ Case studies/examples included
□ Original data or research
□ Process documentation
□ Real-world applications shown
□ Personal insights sharedExpertise Signals:
□ Author credentials visible
□ Author bio with qualifications
□ Technical accuracy verified
□ Comprehensive coverage
□ Expert quotes/interviews
□ Specialized terminology used correctlyAuthority Signals:
□ Authoritative external citations
□ Links to primary sources
□ Industry recognition mentioned
□ Published research referenced
□ Brand authority established
□ Backlink profile (if available)Trust Signals:
□ Contact information accessible
□ Privacy policy linked
□ Editorial guidelines visible
□ Sources cited inline
□ Last updated date shown
□ Author photo and bio
□ Secure site (HTTPS)Best Practices:
□ 3-10 internal links per 1000 words
□ Descriptive anchor text (not "click here")
□ Links to related content
□ Links from high-authority pages
□ Logical link hierarchy
□ No orphan pages
□ Breadcrumb navigationMetrics to Evaluate (if available):
□ Organic traffic trend
□ Average position for target keywords
□ Click-through rate (CTR)
□ Bounce rate
□ Time on page
□ Pages per session
□ Conversion rateBenchmarks:
| Metric | Poor | Average | Good |
|---|---|---|---|
| CTR (pos 1-3) | <3% | 3-8% | >8% |
| Bounce rate | >70% | 50-70% | <50% |
| Time on page | <1min | 1-3min | >3min |
# SEO Content Audit Report
**Page:** [URL or filename]
**Date:** [Date]
**Overall Score:** X/100
## Executive Summary
[2-3 sentence overview of findings]
## Scores by Category
| Category | Score | Status |
|----------|-------|--------|
| On-Page SEO | X/20 | [Good/Needs Work/Critical] |
| Content Quality | X/25 | [Good/Needs Work/Critical] |
| Keyword Optimization | X/15 | [Good/Needs Work/Critical] |
| E-E-A-T Signals | X/20 | [Good/Needs Work/Critical] |
| AI/GEO Readiness | X/20 | [Good/Needs Work/Critical] |
## Priority Issues (Fix First)
1. **[Issue]** - [Impact] - [Fix]
2. **[Issue]** - [Impact] - [Fix]
3. **[Issue]** - [Impact] - [Fix]
## On-Page SEO Findings
- Title: [Current] → [Recommended]
- Meta: [Current] → [Recommended]
- Headers: [Analysis]
- URL: [Analysis]
## Content Quality Findings
- C.R.E.A.T.E. Score: X/24
- Word count: [X] (Recommended: [Y])
- Readability: Grade [X]
- Gaps: [List]
## Keyword Analysis
- Primary: [Keyword] - Density: X%
- Missing opportunities: [List]
- Over-optimized: [List if any]
## E-E-A-T Assessment
- Strengths: [List]
- Gaps: [List]
- Recommendations: [List]
## Action Plan
**Immediate (This Week):**
- [ ] Action 1
- [ ] Action 2
**Short-term (This Month):**
- [ ] Action 1
- [ ] Action 2
**Ongoing:**
- [ ] Action 1
- [ ] Action 2On-Page SEO (20 points):
Content Quality (25 points):
Keyword Optimization (15 points):
E-E-A-T (20 points):
AI/GEO Readiness (20 points):
When comparing against competitors:
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.