x-eoSAFE
근거 등급을 구분해 SEO·AEO·GEO를 점검·수정·검증하는 에이전트 스킬. 기술 SEO, 구조화 데이터, AI 검색 인용 표본과 한국 검색 환경 지원
Overview
근거 등급을 구분해 SEO·AEO·GEO를 점검·수정·검증하는 에이전트 스킬. 기술 SEO, 구조화 데이터, AI 검색 인용 표본과 한국 검색 환경 지원
f91c3dbc963dOBSERVED · 2026-10-10Host compatibility
What the documentation claims. We have not run a compatibility test.
| Host | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| copilot | mentioned |
What it tells the agent
The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.
--- name: x-eo description: One-stop SEO + AEO + GEO toolkit entry point. Use for any request about search visibility, AI-search / answer-engine readiness, "GEO score", llms.txt, structured data (JSON-LD), robots.txt and AI crawlers, sitemaps, hreflang/i18n SEO, E-E-A-T/content, local or e-commerce SEO, or when a site scores low on any SEO/GEO checker. Routes to x-eo-audit (measure), x-eo-fix (change), x-eo-verify (prove nothing broke). Every recommendation is graded by evidence tier. --- # x-eo — router and shared rules Reply in the user's language. **An audit score is a proxy, not the outcome.** Tools reward files and markup; what matters is whether crawlers can read the page and whether engines cite it. So every finding carries an evidence tier, and you never oversell. ## Four skills, one loop | Skill | Job | Use when | |---|---|---| | `x-eo-audit` | Measure: scored audit (Tier C separated), host-root check, topic checklists | "how are we doing?", baseline, re-measure after deploy | | `x-eo-fix` | Change: robots, JSON-LD, llms-full, AI files, sub-path root, IndexNow | a finding needs implementing | | `x-eo-verify` | Prove: before/after build diff, JSON-LD parse, JS-on/off render diff | before shipping any change meant to raise a score | | `x-eo` (this) | Shared tiers, honesty rules, topic map | start here, or for pure advice/planning | Typical order: **audit → fix → verify → deploy → audit (live)**. Install all four together. ## Evidence tiers (label every finding) | Tier | Meaning | Examples | Treatment | |---|---|---|---| | **A** | Vendor-documented or directly observable | reachable (200, no auth wall); content in raw HTML without JS; correct canonical/hreflang; sitemap; robots not blocking search crawlers; JSON-LD that parses and matches visible text | Fix first | | **B** | Plausible; third-party/correlational support | question-shaped headings, self-contained answer passages, freshness, entity consistency + `sameAs`, original data, off-site mentions | Do when it also serves readers; say "plausible" | | **C** | Convention, no demonstrated consumption | `llms.txt`, `llms-full.txt`, `ai.txt`, `/ai/*.json`, WebMCP, agent `SearchAction`, RSS-for-AI | Only if free and risk-free. **Never count as success.** Google's AI guide (2026-07-10) says it ignores them | | **SEC** | Security finding | prompt-injection surface, exposed secrets | Report separately | Sources and what was verified vs only reported: [references/evidence.md](references/evidence.md). Thirteen recurring traps: [references/pitfalls.md](references/pitfalls.md). Tool landscape: [references/tools.md](references/tools.md). ## Topic map — where the knowledge is Vendored, condensed from claude-seo (MIT, see [NOTICE](references/claude-seo/NOTICE.md)). Read only the file for the topic at hand. | Topic | File | |---|---| | Crawl/index, CWV, security headers, JS rendering, mobile | [technical](references/claude-seo/technical.md) | | Single-page on-page review (title, meta, headings, links) | [page-analysis](references/claude-seo/page-analysis.md) | | Content quality, E-E-A-T, AI-content, readability | [content-eeat](references/claude-seo/content-eeat.md) | | Structured data / JSON-LD types and rules | [schema](references/claude-seo/schema.md) | | GEO: AI Overviews, ChatGPT/Perplexity citation tactics, passage structure, llms.txt stance | [geo](references/claude-seo/geo.md) | | Agentic / MCP / machine-readable readiness | [agentic](references/claude-seo/agentic.md) | | Sitemaps (size limits, lastmod, index files) | [sitemap](references/claude-seo/sitemap.md) | | Images (alt, formats, lazy loading, OG) | [images](references/claude-seo/images.md) | | Multilingual: hreflang, locale URLs | [hreflang](references/claude-seo/hreflang.md) | | Local SEO / business profile | [local](references/claude-seo/local.md) | | E-commerce / product schema | [ecommerce](references/claude-seo/ecommerce.md) | | Strategy, roadmap, competitor framing | [planning](references/claude-seo/planning.md) | | Korea: Naver Search Advisor, Yeti/Daumoa, KakaoTalk previews, IndexNow | [korea](references/korea.md) (original) | Claude-seo's advice is vendored as knowledge, not authority: where it conflicts with this file's tiers, the tiers win. ## Honesty rules - Don't invent facts to satisfy a check: no fake `dateModified`, no `sameAs` to profiles that aren't the entity's, no made-up address/phone/reviews. - Don't put personal data (email, phone) in structured data on many pages for a point. - Keyword-density / boilerplate warnings can be false positives on legitimate content — say so. - A tool's recommendation list is a menu, not a to-do list. - Report the score **and** the score excluding Tier C. - Citation in ChatGPT/Claude/Perplexity is only **sampled** (`x-eo-audit/scripts/ai-recall.mjs`, needs API keys), never measured as a rate; don't promise it. ## Report template ``` Scope: <urls> Tool: <name+version> Date: <date> Score: A → B (excluding Tier C: a% → b%) Done: [A] ... [B] ... [C] ... Skipped: ... (why) Verified: build diff, JSON-LD parse, JS on/off DOM, live re-measure Not expected to move: ... (Tier C points are optionality) ```
Trust audit
SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.
| Layer | What it checks | Result |
|---|---|---|
| L0 | Provenance & inventory | PASS |
| L1 | Static analysis of the code | NA |
| L2 | Instruction surface (what it tells the agent) | PASS |
| L3 | Class-specific surface | PASS |
| L4 | Behavioural (sandbox) | SKIPPED |
What the source does
- Filesystem
- none-observed
- Network
- none-observed
- Shell
- none-observed
- Dependencies
- pinned
- Secrets in source
- none-found
Findings (2)
8. **Third-party tools run your machine's code.** Use a venv, pin the version, read install scripts, beware tools that install global agents/skills (name collisions overwrite silently) or hooks that f
| **claude-seo** (AgriciDaniel) | MIT · plugin, v2.4 | 26 sub-skills / 19 agents; Playwright rendering; strong SSRF module (`url_safety.py`: decimal/hex/octal IPs, metadata endpoints, DNS pinning) | *
Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.
f91c3dbc963dfull audit observations/trust-audit/skill/jungrok5__x-eo.json · Report an issue / request a re-scanAudit history
Every audit this skill has had.
| Date | Source | Verdict | Grade | Score | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-10 | f91c3dbc963d | SAFE | B | 89 | first audit |
Questions
What does the x-eo skill do?
근거 등급을 구분해 SEO·AEO·GEO를 점검·수정·검증하는 에이전트 스킬. 기술 SEO, 구조화 데이터, AI 검색 인용 표본과 한국 검색 환경 지원
Is x-eo safe to install?
The audit found nothing in the source that contradicts what it says it does, and graded it B (89/100). Grade A is held back for packages that have also passed a sandboxed behavioural run, which is why a clean skill reads B.
What can x-eo access on my machine?
The audit observed no filesystem, network or shell use at all in its source.
Which assistants does x-eo work with?
Its documentation mentions copilot. That is what the text claims, not a compatibility test we ran.
How current is this page?
The grade is for one exact copy of the source (f91c3dbc963d), read on 2026-10-10. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.