seo-audit

What the source does

• FilesystemNone observedNo reads or writes in the source
• NetworkNone observedNo outbound calls in the source
• ShellNone observedNo commands run in the source
• DependenciesPinnedNothing floats
• SecretsNone foundNo keys in source

Five audit layers

Gates applied: no behavioural pass.

.claude/skills/create-repo-skill

.claude/skills/deslop

.claude/skills/evaluate-skill

.claude/skills/merge-ready

.claude/skills/observability-triage

Audit 0.4.1 · source sha 1de138a01cbe · 29 Oct 2026Report an issue or request a re-scan

• Publisherevery-app GitHub organizationOwner of the repository this skill is read from
• Source folderevery-app/open-seo/.agents/skills/seo-auditThe exact folder we audited
• LicenceMITAs the repository states it
• Commit pinned for this verdict1de138a01cbeA new audit runs when the source changes
• Repository statusNot archivedLast push 2 days ago
• Sandboxed runNot runSkills are read, not executed; layer L4 is skipped

Its description: Audit a website, investigate its real search opportunities, and deliver a short data-backed report on the few changes most likely to grow organic traffic that converts.

---
name: seo-audit
description: "Audit a website, investigate its real search opportunities, and deliver a short data-backed report on the few changes most likely to grow organic traffic that converts."
---

# OpenSEO SEO Audit

## Goal

Find the work that would most improve a site's useful organic traffic, then explain it so a non-expert can act on it. Research broadly; recommend selectively. The report leads with one to three recommendations that either capture meaningfully more qualified search demand or stop a real loss.

Use this when asked for an SEO audit or review of a domain, especially for a shareable report. For expert-facing analysis of a competitor or market, use `competitor-analysis` or `competitive-landscape` instead.

## Inputs and project context

- Domain to audit and `projectId` (`list_projects`; if no project matches, `create_project`).
- Call `get_project_context` first. This skill needs `business_overview`. If it is empty, infer what the business does from the site, confirm it with the user in one question, write it back with `update_project_context`, and continue. Suggest `seo-project-setup` at the end for the rest; never front-load the full interview.
- Reuse research-log results under 30 days old for discovery. A ranking claim that drives a recommendation still needs a live check made during this audit.
- On finish, write back what is durable with `update_project_context` (a corrected `business_overview`, the pages the report names via `addKeyPages`) and append `{ appendResearchLog: { summary: "Site audit: <domain>. Verdict: <conclusion>" } }`.

Deliver through the `seo-report` skill, saving with `skill: "seo-audit"`. If that skill is unavailable, say so and stop before writing HTML.

## OpenSEO MCP tools

- `whoami`: confirm the connection and credits before spending. If OpenSEO is not connected, stop and ask the user to connect it.
- `run_site_audit`, then `get_audit_status` (wait a minute or two between checks), `get_audit_issues`, `get_audit_pages`. Leave Lighthouse off unless the user asked for performance depth. Crawl reads are free.
- `get_backlinks_overview` and `get_domain_overview`: orientation only. Provider traffic and keyword counts are estimates with no single observation date; they are not measured visits.
- `get_ranked_keywords`: which queries send which pages traffic. Start with one domain-level call with `resultTypes: ["organic"]`; use `scope: "exact_url"` for the specific pages you compare. A page missing from a limited domain sample is not proof it has no rankings. Ranking rows carry their own `last_updated_time`; keyword metric dates are not ranking dates.
- `get_serp_results`: the live check behind every ranking claim in the report. The returned `rank` counts every result block, so count organic (unpaid) listings yourself and report the spot with its page, ten spots per page: "#10 (page 1)", "#11 (page 2)". Request depth 20; a page not seen is "not in the first 20 results". Record the exact query, country, language, date, how many organic listings came back, and the matching URL; those details go in the evidence appendix, not the tables. A failed lookup is unknown, not "not in the first 20 results".
- `get_search_console_performance`: when connected, first-party clicks and impressions separate low visibility from low click-through. Missing access is a coverage gap, not a blocker.
- `get_keyword_metrics` and `research_keywords`: demand for the queries a candidate page targets. One focused metrics batch usually suffices; one research call with 1–3 seeds when a demand gap could change the decision.
- Web reading (fetch, scrape, or search): the site's own pages, sitemap, the leading results for a query, and competitor pages.

Research until another lookup is unlikely to change which opportunities lead. Respect an explicit user budget and say which comparison it prevented.

## Workflow

### 1. Orient

`whoami`, resolve the project, start `run_site_audit`. While it crawls: backlinks overview, domain overview, the domain-level ranked-keyword sample, and the sitemap plus navigation. Write down the site's page families from the sitemap, not just the crawl sample: product, pricing, comparison or alternative, tools and templates, guides, categories, services, locations, whatever the site actually has.

If the crawl is broken or nearly empty (certificate error, 5xx, one page), investigate before anything else. Check redirects and certificate variants yourself and search for the business; a dead domain with a live successor flips the whole recommendation to "redirect the old domain".

### 2. Investigate every family that matters to the goal

For each family that could bring buyers, read at least two pages' main content (ignore navigation and shared templates): the page performing best in the ranking data and one performing worst or typical. For each page ask: what decision or question does its searcher have, and does the page answer it with specific, accurate, sourced information, or does it substitute a name, location, or keyword into a shared answer? Compare against what the leading results for that query provide.

A common SaaS pattern worth checking directly: competitor comparison or alternative pages and competitor pricing pages are two separate families, each answering a different buying question. Read siblings side by side. Investigate uneven visibility between siblings (intent, content specificity, links, authority); a sibling that already ranks near the top is something to protect rather than rewrite.

Check the basics for any page you might name: status, canonical (the URL the page declares as its preferred version), index directives, and how visitors reach it internally. Broaden when a family is missing from the crawl, when siblings perform very differently, when a tool or template page turns out to rank, or when a live query returns a different page than expected.

Run the live checks now, not after drafting: the query cluster each candidate

Excerpt, first 6,000 characters of SKILL.md, verbatim from the audited commit. It is text from someone else’s repository, quoted so you can judge it before your agent reads it.

git clone https://github.com/every-app/open-seo
git -C open-seo checkout 1de138a01cbe

Works in

1. 2026-10-29
   !CAUTION B 89 / 100

   first audit · source 1de138a01cbe

Questions about seo-audit

• github.com/every-app/open-seo/tree/main/.agents/skills/seo-audit — the audited source at commit 1de138a01cbe and every finding aboveObserved · 29 Oct 2026

Spotted something wrong? Report a correction · Methodology