content-refresh
Skill0 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Find pages that have lost rankings or traffic and fix them, rather than writing new ones. Use whenever the user reports declining traffic, content decay, pages slipping in rankings, an article that used to rank and doesn't, a traffic drop after a Google update, or asks whether to update or rewrite existing content. Also use when the user asks what to do with old blog posts, how to prune content, whether to delete or redirect thin pages, or wants the highest-return work on a site that already has published content.
7 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- webrenew/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- ffidelis16/GEO-OStheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- lcrvl2/seo-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 15, 2026
- khadinakbarlabs/vibeseo-plugintheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- UXMagicai/seosorted-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 4, 2026
- Gfako/claude-codetheir own version, first seen Jun 8, 2026
Other versions7 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 7
- indranilbanerjee/contentforge★ 32same name
- webrenew/skills★ 2same name
- Gfako/claude-code★ 1same name
- ffidelis16/GEO-OS★ 0same name
- khadinakbarlabs/vibeseo-plugin★ 0same name
- lcrvl2/seo-skills★ 0same name
- UXMagicai/seosorted-skills★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository29 other files it gives its agents.
- ai-bot-log-analysisSkill
- ai-crawler-policySkill
- ai-visibility-auditSkill
- best-of-listicle-pagesSkill
- canonical-duplicate-contentSkill
- comparison-alternatives-pagesSkill
- core-web-vitalsSkill
- ecommerce-seoSkill
- eeat-author-pagesSkill
- entity-brand-consistencySkill
- featured-snippet-passagesSkill
- glossary-definition-hubSkill
- hreflang-international-seoSkill
- image-seoSkill
- internal-linking-architectureSkill
- keyword-cannibalizationSkill
- keyword-research-briefsSkill
- link-building-outreachSkill
- local-seoSkill
- nextjs-seoSkill
- programmatic-seoSkill
- redirect-migration-planSkill
- schema-markupSkill
- search-console-analysisSkill
- shopify-seoSkill
- technical-seo-auditSkill
- topical-authority-mapSkill
- video-seoSkill
- wordpress-seoSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
10 rules. 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 6 edited versions we read keep these.
10
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 51
Prune: No traffic, no links, no purpose, no path to being useful.
- Distinctive: line 61
Fix the intent match first: If the SERP now wants a comparison and you wrote a definition, that's the whole job.
- Distinctive: line 67
Rewrite the title and description: if CTR was the diagnosis. Test the promise, not the keyword placement.
- Distinctive: line 73
When merging pages, order matters or you'll lose the equity you're trying to gather.
- Distinctive: line 78
Update every internal link to point at the winner directly, not through the redirect.
- Distinctive: line 79
Remove the losers from the sitemap.
- Distinctive: line 80
Leave the redirects in place permanently.
- Distinctive: line 90
When someone reports a drop after an update, resist the urge to prescribe.
- Distinctive: line 107
Don't refresh a page whose query no longer has traffic: Check demand still exists before spending the day.
- Distinctive: line 111
Search Console is the primary source for all of step 1 and it's free.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 6 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Content Refresh and Decay Recovery
On any site with more than fifty published pages, updating what exists usually returns more than publishing something new. The page already has links, history and index presence. You're moving it from position 11 to position 4, not from nothing to something.
The hard part isn't the rewriting. It's picking the right pages and correctly diagnosing why each one fell.
Step 1: Find the candidates
Four queries against Search Console, in order of return.
Striking distance. Pages averaging position 5 to 20 with meaningful impressions. These have already been judged relevant and are one improvement away from real traffic. Highest return on the list.
Decayed. Compare the last 90 days against the same period a year ago. Sort by clicks lost. A page that fell from 900 clicks to 200 is telling you something specific.
High impressions, low CTR. The page ranks but nobody clicks. Often this is a title and description problem, not a content problem, and it's a 20-minute fix. Check the SERP first, because sometimes the answer is that an AI Overview now sits above the result and the clicks aren't coming back.
Zero-click pages. Indexed, no impressions, no clicks, no links. These are pruning candidates, not refresh candidates.
Sort every candidate by clicks lost times commercial value. Work down that list.
Step 2: Diagnose before rewriting
Rewriting a page that fell for a technical reason wastes a day. Work through these in order and stop at the first one that fits.
| Symptom | Likely cause | Check |
| Traffic fell off a cliff on one date | Algorithm update, or a technical break | Compare the date to known update dates; check indexing status |
| Gradual decline over months | Competitors improved, content aged | Read the current top five |
| Lost rankings, page still indexed | Intent shifted, or content is stale | Look at what now ranks and whether it's a different format |
| Impressions steady, clicks down | SERP changed above you | Search the term and look at what's occupying the top of the page |
| Whole section fell together | Technical or sitewide issue | Check canonicals, noindex, redirects, internal links |
| Two of your pages trading positions | Cannibalisation | See keyword-cannibalization |
The check that matters most is the simplest one: run the query and read the results that beat you. Not the tool's summary of them. The actual pages. In ten minutes you'll usually know exactly what's missing.
Step 3: Decide the action
Four options, and picking correctly matters more than executing well.
Update. The page is fundamentally right and has aged. Refresh data, add what's missing, tighten. Most common outcome.
Rewrite. The angle is wrong or the intent shifted. Same URL, substantially new content. Keep the URL because it holds the history and the links.
Consolidate. Several thin pages compete for one topic. Merge into the strongest URL, 301 the rest, update internal links. This tends to produce the largest single jumps.
Prune. No traffic, no links, no purpose, no path to being useful. Delete and return 410, or redirect to the closest genuinely relevant page. Redirecting everything to the homepage is a soft 404 and gains nothing.
Pruning is undersold. A site carrying 300 pages nobody reads is asking a crawler to spend its budget on them, and it dilutes what the site appears to be about.
Step 4: Do the update properly
A refresh that changes the date and adds a paragraph does nothing. Google discounts it and readers notice.
Work through this list:
- Fix the intent match first. If the SERP now wants a comparison and you wrote a definition, that's the whole job.
- Answer the question in the first 100 words. Most decayed posts open with 200 words of throat-clearing.
- Add the sub-questions competitors answer and you don't. Pull them from People Also Ask and from reading the top results.
- Replace stale specifics. Prices, versions, screenshots, dates, statistics, tool names, anything with a year in it. This is the bulk of decay on practical content.
- Cut what's no longer true, and say so where the change matters to a reader.
- Add something genuinely new — original data, a real example, a table, a decision framework. The reason to rank again is that the page is better, not that it's fresher.
- Rewrite the title and description if CTR was the diagnosis. Test the promise, not the keyword placement.
- Re-do internal links in both directions. Newer posts should link to this one.
- Update
dateModifiedin the schema, honestly, because you actually changed it.
Step 5: Consolidation mechanics
When merging pages, order matters or you'll lose the equity you're trying to gather.
- Pick the winner: the URL with the most links and best existing position, not the best content.
- Move the genuinely useful sections from each loser into the winner. Don't concatenate.
- 301 every loser to the winner.
- Update every internal link to point at the winner directly, not through the redirect.
- Remove the losers from the sitemap; make sure the winner is in it.
- Leave the redirects in place permanently. Removing them later loses everything they carry.
Step 6: Measure honestly
Set expectations before the work, not after. Refreshed pages typically move within two to six weeks. A page that hasn't moved in eight weeks was misdiagnosed, and the answer is usually that the intent was wrong rather than that the writing was.
Record for each page: date changed, what changed, position before, clicks before. Without that, you can't tell refreshing from noise.
The traffic-drop conversation
When someone reports a drop after an update, resist the urge to prescribe. Establish first:
- Is it traffic or rankings? Rankings flat with traffic down means the SERP changed, not the site.
- Is it the whole site or a section? Sectional drops are usually technical.
- Is it one query or all of them?
- Did anything ship that week? Deploys cause more "algorithm updates" than algorithms do.
- Are the pages still indexed?
Core updates are re-assessments of quality across the whole index, and recovery comes from the site being genuinely better, over months, not from a tweak. Anyone promising a fix in a fortnight is selling something. Say that plainly and then get to work on the parts that are real.
Don't do these
- Don't change the date and republish. It's a known pattern and it's discounted.
- Don't change URLs during a refresh. You'll trade a ranking problem for a redirect problem.
- Don't delete a page that has backlinks. Redirect it to the closest relevant page instead.
- Don't refresh everything at once. You'll never know what worked. Batch by topic, measure, continue.
- Don't add word count as a fix. Length isn't the variable. Answered questions are.
- Don't refresh a page whose query no longer has traffic. Check demand still exists before spending the day.
Where the data comes from
Search Console is the primary source for all of step 1 and it's free. Query it for the last 16 months, compare periods, and export. Everything in this skill can be done with it alone.
What it won't tell you is how the same pages are performing in AI answers, where a page can lose clicks while gaining citations or lose both without any ranking change. Keupera pairs Search Console data with AI Brand Radar for the citation side and content scoring for the rewrite itself, over MCP, which is useful when decay is happening on a surface Search Console doesn't fully report on:
claude mcp add --transport http keupera https://mcp.keupera.com/mcp -s userRelated skills
search-console-analysis, keyword-cannibalization, featured-snippet-passages, internal-linking-architecture, topical-authority-map, redirect-migration-plan
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.

