topical-authority-map
Skill21 starsChanged 20 days agoMITView on GitHub
Builds a 4-cluster Topical Authority Map from a seed keyword. Outputs an .xlsx spreadsheet with five tabs (Core Pages, AOR Pages, Linking Map, Buyer Journey, Publishing Order) plus a markdown strategy document. Interactive, asks the user to confirm central entity, source context, persona, classification, and gaps at five checkpoints. Trigger when the user provides a seed keyword, niche, business type, or asks for a topical map, content plan, site architecture, topic cluster, or publishing roadmap.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- keupera/seo-skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 7, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- keupera/seo-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 repositoryOne other file it gives its agents.
- review-proof-sorterSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈3
Distinctive · estimate
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 26
No file tools?: If you cannot create files in this environment, output each spreadsheet tab as its own CSV code block and the strategy …
- Distinctive: line 36
Lower cost of retrieval: Every title, heading, paragraph, and image should map to a real query.
- Distinctive: line 70
When you finish, present both deliverables to the user with a one-paragraph summary of what to read first (Core, then AOR, then Linking, …
≈ “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
You are building a Topical Authority Map. This is a structured site architecture built around how we think Google and AI search engines decide which sites are the specialist on a topic. It is NOT a keyword list. It is NOT a list of topics. It is the blueprint for an entire website's content strategy, built around a single central entity and routed through four connected clusters.
The four clusters:
- Core Pages (the money pages users buy from)
- AOR Pages (Areas of Relevance, the supporting authority articles)
- Linking Map (which page links to which page, with what anchor text)
- Buyer Journey (every page tagged TOFU, MOFU, or BOFU)
Plus a fifth output: a 12-week Publishing Order with content briefs that turns the map into a content plan.
Output: Two deliverables.
.xlsxspreadsheet with five tabs: Core Pages, AOR Pages, Linking Map, Buyer Journey, Publishing Order..mdstrategy document covering central entity, source context, persona, folder structure, linking rules, an optional NLP category check, and quality standards.
Mode: Interactive. Pause at the five checkpoints (marked Checkpoint 1 to Checkpoint 5 in the reference files) to confirm decisions with the user before proceeding. Do not skip checkpoints.
Data honesty. This skill leans on search volumes, SERPs, People Also Ask and autocomplete. Use them only when you can actually see them: through a web search tool, a keyword tool, or data the user pastes (Semrush, Ahrefs, Google Keyword Planner). Search Console impressions are not search volume: they count how often this one site appeared in results, not how many people searched. If the user gives you impressions, keep them in their own column headed "GSC impressions" with the date range, never in the Search Volume column, and never use them for the merge and split thresholds. When you cannot see real volumes, say so, ask the user to paste what they have, and write "no data" in the Search Volume column. Never estimate a search volume or invent a PAA question and present it as researched. Where volume is missing, make merge and split calls on competitor coverage and on whether it is a service the business sells, and say that is what you did.
No file tools? If you cannot create files in this environment, output each spreadsheet tab as its own CSV code block and the strategy document as markdown, and tell the user to paste each CSV into a separate sheet.
Why we think topical maps work
Here is how we think about why topical maps work. These five points are our working theory from running this method on client sites, not confirmed Google mechanisms, and none of them is E-E-A-T marketing:
- Historical user data accumulation. Our working theory: every visitor adds to Google's picture of your site, so a topical map concentrates that picture on one topic and gives Google more evidence that you satisfy users on it. Spread it across four unrelated topics and we think you lose on all four.
- Knowledge Graph alignment. Google has entities with attributes and relationships. We think a site built to MATCH what Google already knows about your entity is easier for Google to understand and match to searches.
- Lower cost of retrieval. Every title, heading, paragraph, and image should map to a real query. Our working theory: pages that answer a clear query in a clear structure are easier for Google to understand and rank.
- Satisfaction signal transfer. We think that when an AOR page satisfies a reader and links to a core page, it helps that core page too. More good AOR pages, stronger core pages.
- Index construction efficiency. Our reasoning: it is simpler for a search engine to serve one site for many related queries than many different sites for one query each, so deep, well-organised coverage gives Google a reason to serve more of the topic from your domain.
Critical warning: A topical map filled with low-quality content hurts the whole site. Bad pages drag every other page down. Do not publish to fill the map. Every article must be quality work. If you cannot write a good article on a topic, leave it out.
Execution order
Load reference files as you progress through each phase. Complete every checkpoint before moving on.
Phase 1: Research and classification (load references/01-research-and-classify.md)
- Step 1: Define the central entity (Checkpoint 1)
- Step 2: Source context plus persona, the real author or reviewer (Checkpoint 2)
- Step 3: Deep research on Knowledge Graph, competitors, client situations, attributes (Checkpoint 3)
- Step 4: Classify each attribute as Core or AOR
- Step 5: Merge and split decisions plus depth calibration (Checkpoint 4)
Phase 2: Architecture and keywords (load references/02-architecture-and-keywords.md)
- Step 6: Define folder structure
- Step 7: Map every page to TOFU, MOFU, or BOFU (Checkpoint 5)
- Step 8: Query expansion plus cost of retrieval scoring
- Step 9: Keyword selection for page titles
- Step 10: Define the linking architecture
Phase 3: Execution and output (load references/03-execution-and-output.md)
- Step 11: Central entity sitewide presence
- Step 12: NLP category check (optional diagnostic)
- Step 13: Content briefs for the first 30 articles
- Step 14: Publishing order across 12 weeks
- Generate the .xlsx with five tabs
- Generate the strategy .md document
When you finish, present both deliverables to the user with a one-paragraph summary of what to read first (Core, then AOR, then Linking, then Buyer Journey, then Publishing Order) and where to start writing this week.
The map is dynamic, not static. Google's indexes change. Review and update the map quarterly.
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.

