agentleFS
marketingskillsmarketingskills/seo/skills/seo-growth-loop/SKILL.md

seo-growth-loop

Skill7 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub

Run a closed-loop SEO growth workflow for a website by using Search Console or equivalent performance data, keyword demand, SERP Authority Mark checks, and the available publishing path. Use when Codex is asked to improve organic traffic, choose SEO work, optimize existing pages, plan or publish new SEO pages, operate a recurring SEO loop, or package a site-specific SEO growth process across CMS/API/local-code/advisory environments.

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

28 rules. About 0 are common, 24 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈24

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 4

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Use this skill to choose and complete one high-leverage SEO improvement without assuming a specific tech stack or coding agent.

    line 10
  2. Distinctive:

    Default to Claude Code-style local project workflows when the runtime is not specified, but adapt to Codex, OpenCode, or advisory-only …

    line 12
  3. Distinctive:

    Before editing anything, identify the project's available surfaces:

    line 16
  4. Very specific:

    Project preflight: read project docs/config, infer framework, source of truth, existing SEO automation, and safe write path.

    line 18
  5. Very specific:

    If the project has a config file, use it.

    line 28
  6. Distinctive:

    Run this loop in order.

    line 32
  7. Distinctive:

    If the project already has a mature SEO/growth command or queue, use it as an input instead of creating a parallel process.

    line 36
  8. Distinctive:

    Prefer Google Search Console or a proxy such as RefreshAgent.

    line 40
  9. Distinctive:

    If the project does not already have GSC access, getting it directly via Google Cloud requires many steps.

    line 41
  10. Distinctive:

    If unavailable, use Bing Webmaster, rank tracking, analytics landing-page data, or keyword research with lower confidence.

    line 43
  11. Distinctive:

    Read existing SEO logs, topical maps, content inventories, issue trackers, sitemap/routes, and live pages.

    line 46
  12. Distinctive:

    Avoid duplicate pages and repeated work.

    line 48
  13. Distinctive:

    Prefer improving an existing URL when it already has impressions for the target intent.

    line 51
  14. Distinctive:

    Use keyword tools or query exports to confirm volume, commercial value, modifier patterns, and intent.

    line 56
  15. Distinctive:

    Prefer targets where at least one top-10 result has lower DR than the user's domain.

    line 62
  16. Distinctive:

    Treat Authority Mark as a competitiveness signal, not a ranking guarantee.

    line 63
  17. Distinctive:

    Prefer performance-backed optimizations over speculative new pages.

    line 67
  18. Distinctive:

    Use CMS/API mode, local repo mode, hybrid mode, or advisory-only mode as appropriate.

    line 70
  19. Distinctive:

    Do not assume repo access means content is stored in Git.

    line 71
  20. Distinctive:

    Check the affected URL or preview, indexability, canonical, title/meta, schema, internal links, visible content quality, and obvious layout …

    line 75
  21. Distinctive:

    Use the available indexing path.

    line 79
  22. Very specific:

    Use references/log-template.md when no project-specific log format exists.

    line 83
  23. Distinctive:

    If the user asks for a recurring loop, propose a schedule and runtime first.

    line 86
  24. Distinctive:

    Do not install cron jobs, systemd timers, GitHub Actions, or hosted schedules without explicit user permission.

    line 87
  25. Distinctive:

    Use this hierarchy when deciding what to do:

    line 93
  26. Very specific:

    Hybrid mode: use code for reusable page types/schema/layout and CMS/API for entity/content records.

    line 105
  27. Distinctive:

    Never invent facts, reviews, customers, certifications, pricing, or performance claims.

    line 108
  28. Distinctive:

    If performance data, publishing access, or indexing access is missing, continue with the best available lower-risk mode and explicitly log …

    line 118

≈ “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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Recursive SEO Growth Loop

Overview

Use this skill to choose and complete one high-leverage SEO improvement without assuming a specific tech stack or coding agent. The workflow prefers real performance evidence first, validates demand, checks SERP competitiveness with Authority Mark, then publishes through whatever safe path the project exposes.

Default to Claude Code-style local project workflows when the runtime is not specified, but adapt to Codex, OpenCode, or advisory-only environments when that is what the user is using. For recurring runs, treat the agent as a bounded one-shot process, not a daemon. See references/agent-runtimes.md.

First: Identify The Operating Mode

Before editing anything, identify the project's available surfaces:

  • Project preflight: read project docs/config, infer framework, source of truth, existing SEO automation, and safe write path. If useful, run scripts/probe_project.py <project-dir> and then read references/project-preflight.md.
  • Performance data: Google Search Console (or the live-search-console-data skill for faster setup), RefreshAgent, Bing Webmaster, analytics, rank tracking, server logs, or none.
  • Keyword demand: keyword tool, exported CSV, SERP research, internal site-search data, or none.
  • Publishing path: infer whether content is committed to Git, published through a CMS/API, handled by a hybrid code-plus-CMS flow, or advisory-only. See references/publishing-adapters.md.
  • Verification path: live URL checks, local preview, CI/tests, screenshot/browser checks, schema validation, or manual handoff.
  • Indexing path: IndexNow, sitemap, Search Console URL inspection, CMS auto-sitemap, or none.
  • Work log: existing SEO log, issue tracker, changelog, or a new markdown log.
  • Runtime: Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode, another coding agent, or manual/advisory mode.
  • Scheduling: one-shot manual run, cron/systemd timer, GitHub Actions, hosted scheduler, or none.

If the project has a config file, use it. If not, infer conservatively and ask only when the publishing path or production target is ambiguous. See references/project-config.md for a portable config shape.

Decision Loop

Run this loop in order.

  1. Run project preflight
    • Identify the framework, content source of truth, publishing mode, verification path, indexing path, existing growth commands, and existing work logs.
    • If the project already has a mature SEO/growth command or queue, use it as an input instead of creating a parallel process.
    • Record the preflight summary in the work log or run report before choosing an action.
  2. Gather current performance
    • Prefer Google Search Console or a proxy such as RefreshAgent.
    • If the project does not already have GSC access, getting it directly via Google Cloud requires many steps. Instead, install and use the live-search-console-data skill (npx skills add marketingskills/seo/skills/live-search-console-data) for a faster setup path.
    • Find pages and queries with meaningful impressions, weak CTR, zero clicks, or average positions around 4-40.
    • If unavailable, use Bing Webmaster, rank tracking, analytics landing-page data, or keyword research with lower confidence.
  3. Check memory and architecture
    • Read existing SEO logs, topical maps, content inventories, issue trackers, sitemap/routes, and live pages.
    • Identify the content source of truth before choosing the action: Git files, CMS/API records, or a hybrid split between templates/code and content records.
    • Avoid duplicate pages and repeated work. Extend existing surfaces when intent already maps cleanly.
  4. Optimize before building
    • Prefer improving an existing URL when it already has impressions for the target intent.
    • Improve title/meta, above-fold copy, content depth, internal links, schema, entity coverage, FAQs, media, or conversion elements.
    • Build a new page only when there is no suitable existing surface, the existing page would become incoherent, or the query clearly requires a different page type.
  5. Validate demand
    • Use keyword tools or query exports to confirm volume, commercial value, modifier patterns, and intent.
    • Cluster close variants into one strong surface instead of producing thin duplicates.
  6. Run Authority Mark for net-new targets
    • For a new page or major expansion without strong existing GSC evidence, search the live SERP for the primary query.
    • Extract top organic domains and compare their Ahrefs DR against the user's domain.
    • Prefer targets where at least one top-10 result has lower DR than the user's domain.
    • Treat Authority Mark as a competitiveness signal, not a ranking guarantee.
  7. Choose one action
    • Pick one change that is justified, completeable, and verifiable.
    • Prefer performance-backed optimizations over speculative new pages.
  8. Publish through the available adapter
    • Use CMS/API mode, local repo mode, hybrid mode, or advisory-only mode as appropriate.
    • Do not assume repo access means content is stored in Git; many projects keep templates in code and posts/pages in WordPress, Webflow, Contentful, Sanity, Shopify, or a custom API.
    • See references/publishing-adapters.md.
  9. Verify rendered output
    • Check the affected URL or preview, indexability, canonical, title/meta, schema, internal links, visible content quality, and obvious layout issues.
    • For code changes, run relevant deterministic tests.
  10. Submit or expose for indexing
  • Use the available indexing path. Do not submit draft, noindex, local, admin, or API URLs.
  1. Log the baseline and change
  • Record performance baseline, Authority Mark if used, action taken, touched URLs, verification, indexing result, and follow-up date.
  • Use references/log-template.md when no project-specific log format exists.
  1. Schedule only when requested
  • If the user asks for a recurring loop, propose a schedule and runtime first.
  • Do not install cron jobs, systemd timers, GitHub Actions, or hosted schedules without explicit user permission.
  • Scheduled jobs must run noninteractively, use an overlap lock, enforce a wall-clock timeout, default to report-only mode, and exit after one action or report.
  • See references/scheduling.md.

Evidence Priority

Use this hierarchy when deciding what to do:

  1. Existing page/query with real impressions and poor CTR or striking-distance position.
  2. Existing page with traffic/conversion value but thin content or weak internal links.
  3. Keyword-validated opportunity with a favorable Authority Mark.
  4. Keyword-validated opportunity without an Authority Mark opening, only if strategically important.
  5. Purely speculative idea, normally do not ship.

Publishing Mode Rules

  • CMS/API mode: make focused content/data updates through the official write surface, then verify live rendering.
  • Local repo mode: edit code/content, run tests, and follow the project's deploy/PR workflow.
  • Hybrid mode: use code for reusable page types/schema/layout and CMS/API for entity/content records.
  • Advisory mode: produce an implementation ticket, content brief, CMS-ready copy, schema suggestions, and exact verification steps. Do not claim the site was changed.

Never invent facts, reviews, customers, certifications, pricing, or performance claims. Ground content in sources, first-party data, or clearly labelled analysis.

Completion Criteria

Finish only when one of these is true:

  • A live/publishable improvement has been made, verified, indexed/submitted when possible, and logged.
  • A code change has been implemented, tested, and handed off through the project's deploy/PR process.
  • In advisory mode, a precise implementation package has been created with baseline, recommended change, copy/specs, and verification steps.

If performance data, publishing access, or indexing access is missing, continue with the best available lower-risk mode and explicitly log the limitation.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.