SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AC seo-audit

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," or "indexing issues." 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-markup. For AI search optimization, see ai-seo.

skytiger6724/qwen-skills Agent Skills author: skytiger6724 3 files body ≈ 2 478 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 3 d ago

When the user wants to audit, review, or diagnose SEO issues on their site.

As a process C 63/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, progress reporting

AnalyzerMarketingtype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Qwen Code Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
A
96/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
92
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
63/100
Has gaps
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
Failures and branches w 10
50
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • 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: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    ✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec

    Process rating: all ten parameters 63/100

    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (web) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 85Steps. 217 steps, 1 vague phrases
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2478 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
    • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
    • low 11 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
    • low No test case covers injection arriving through data

    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)
    • +4No input/output examples
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +5Description quotes 18 example trigger phrases
    • +3Description length 686: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 35 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 217 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 92.