seo-score
Skill81 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Compute the two never-blended 0-100 scores (Search SEO and AI Visibility / GEO-AEO) from a set of findings, with severity-weighted category values, dynamic re-normalization of conditional modules, severity gating, and letter bands. Used by seo-orchestrator and the `score` command.
In this repository33 other files it gives its agents.
- auditSkill
- compareSkill
- fixSkill
- geoSkill
- scoreSkill
- seo-agent-readinessSkill
- seo-ai-crawlersSkill
- seo-ai-discoverySkill
- seo-core-web-vitalsSkill
- seo-crawlabilitySkill
- seo-crawl-renderSkill
- seo-ecommerceSkill
- seo-eeatSkill
- seo-entity-linkingSkill
- seo-fix-applySkill
- seo-freshnessSkill
- seo-geo-answerblocksSkill
- seo-geo-factdensitySkill
- seo-headings-structureSkill
- seo-images-mediaSkill
- seo-indexabilitySkill
- seo-internal-linkingSkill
- seo-internationalSkill
- seo-localSkill
- seo-meta-onpageSkill
- seo-mobileSkill
- seo-orchestratorSkill
- seo-platform-detectSkill
- seo-renderingSkill
- seo-schema-jsonldSkill
- seo-sitemapsSkill
- seo-social-cardsSkill
- seo-vertical-detectSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈0
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 18
Severity gating: if any finding has severity: 5 and status: fail, cap the affected score at 40 and set capped: true.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
<!-- Portions Copyright (c) 2026 Enrique Rocha (@soyenriquerocha) - see LICENSE for original authors · tododeia.com · id er-d03758e1 -->seo-score
Turns findings (conforming to schema/finding.schema.json) into the two scores. Full model in references/scoring-model.md — follow it exactly.
Steps
- Group findings by the category each module maps to, per score. A finding contributes only to the score(s) in
expected_impact.axis(search,ai, orboth). - Category value =
100 × Σ(status_factor × severity for scored findings) / Σ(severity), wherestatus_factor: pass 1.0, warn 0.5, fail 0.0. Excludeneeds_apiandnot_applicablefrom both sums. - Active weights: drop conditional categories (e-commerce/local/international) whose modules produced no findings; re-normalize remaining weights to sum to their active total.
- Score =
Σ(category_value × weight) / Σ(active weight)for each of Search SEO and AI Visibility. - Severity gating: if any finding has
severity: 5andstatus: fail, cap the affected score at 40 and setcapped: true. - Assign bands (A≥90, B≥80, C≥70, D≥60, F<60) and a one-line interpretation from the Search×AI quadrant.
6b. Coverage floor: report
coverage(the % of the axis's always-on weight that carried a scored finding). Below 50% the axis comes backprovisional: truewithstate: "partial"— quote the band and the coverage figure together, never the letter on its own. - M21 (AI discovery & agent endpoints — llms.txt, agents.md, UCP, agentic sitemap) weight is 0 — report it, never let it move the AI score.
Determinism
Prefer node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/score.mjs" --run <run-dir> (it reads <run-dir>/findings.json) or --findings <path> for a bare findings file, adding --vertical a,b, --multilingual and --environment production|preview|staging|local when the file carries no run context, so the number is reproducible and CI-checkable. --run takes a path, never the word latest: the score command resolves latest[:host] from <root>/<host>/latest.json first and passes the directory. If Node is unavailable, compute by hand following the same formula and note the fallback. Either way the math must match references/scoring-model.md.
Output
{ "search_seo": { "value": 78, "band": "C", "capped": false, "interpretation": "...", "categories": [ {"name":"Indexability & Crawl","weight":22,"value":91,"active":true}, ... ] },
"ai_visibility": { "value": 64, "band": "D", "capped": false, "interpretation": "Citable structure missing; add answer blocks and schema.", "categories": [ ... ] } }Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

