SKILLEMALL.ai

CF seo-page

Single-page SEO audit: content quality under Google's E-E-A-T framework and Helpful Content guidelines, on-page factors, search intent, technical signals and readability. Pulls GSC data for the page, crawls the live HTML, checks metadata, schema, internal linking and depth, and produces a scored report with fixes. Use whenever the user wants to analyze a specific page or URL, not the whole site. Trigger on: "analyze this page", "audit this URL", "how is this page doing", "evaluate my blog post", "check this landing page", "page SEO", "content quality check", "is this page good enough", "review this page's SEO", "what's wrong with this page", "how can I improve this page", "page analysis", "single page audit", "content audit for [URL]", or any request naming a specific URL/page for SEO evaluation. If the user provides a specific URL (not just a domain), this is likely the right skill; use /seo-analysis for full-site audits instead.

nowork-studio/notfair-plugin Claude Code author: nowork-studio MIT 1 file body ≈ 59 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 3 d ago

Single-page SEO audit: content quality under Google's E-E-A-T framework and Helpful Content guidelines, on-page factors, search intent, technical signals and…

As a process F 26/100 · No process to follow — References files that are not bundled: ../../seo/seo-page/WORKFLOW.md

AnalyzerMarketingtype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
C
82/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
54
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
F
26/100
No process to follow
References files that are not bundled: ../../seo/seo-page/WORKFLOW.md
Tools and files w 18
0
Steps w 15
0
Result and completion w 14
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

  1. The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
For the model run — optional
  • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
  • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

Guard findings · 0

✓ No critical or high findings

Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: ../../seo/seo-page/WORKFLOW.md

Process rating: all ten parameters 26/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: ../../seo/seo-page/WORKFLOW.md
  • 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: ../../seo/seo-page/WORKFLOW.md
  • 0Steps. Prose only: no discrete steps
  • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
  • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
  • 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
  • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
  • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 59 tokens
  • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations

Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

Quality signals

  • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
  • +3Description length 944: 120–800 characters recommended
  • +4Structure: 1 headings, hard to scan
  • +3No numbered steps or checklist
  • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
  • +4No input/output examples
  • -15SKILL.md body under 300 characters: nearly empty
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +5Description quotes 14 example trigger phrases

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 54.