technical-seo-triage
Skill7 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Prioritize crawl, indexation, canonical, schema, and internal-link issues from crawler output or Search Console. Use when Codex needs to identify and rank technical SEO fixes by impact.
In this repository22 other files it gives its agents.
- authority-mark-keyword-difficultySkill
- cannibalization-checkSkill
- client-report-writerSkill
- competitor-serp-monitorSkill
- content-decay-monitor-setupSkill
- content-moat-plannerSkill
- content-refresh-briefSkill
- exceed-quality-thresholdSkill
- internal-link-builderSkill
- keyword-opportunity-finderSkill
- keyword-plannerSkill
- live-search-console-dataSkill
- proposal-builderSkill
- refresh-vs-new-contentSkill
- schema-fix-writerSkill
- seo-content-briefSkill
- seo-growth-loopSkill
- seo-offer-architectSkill
- seo-priority-scoreSkill
- seo-strategySkill
- title-meta-rewriterSkill
- traffic-decay-detectorSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
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 15
Search Console coverage report (pasted or via live data bridge)
≈ “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
Technical SEO Triage
Overview
Given crawl data or Search Console coverage data, identify and prioritize technical SEO issues by their expected impact on organic performance. Covers crawl errors, indexation gaps, canonical misconfigurations, schema validation, and internal link structure problems.
Inputs
- Crawl output (Screaming Frog, Sitebulb, or custom JSON/CSV)
- Search Console coverage report (pasted or via live data bridge)
- Optional: sitemap URLs
Workflow
- Load and normalize the crawl or coverage data.
- Identify issues by category:
- Crawl: 4xx/5xx, redirect chains, blocked resources, excessive depth
- Indexation: noindex on organic pages, orphan pages, thin content detected
- Canonical: missing, conflicting, or cross-domain canonicals
- Schema: missing core schema, validation errors, type mismatch
- Internal links: broken links, orphan pages, excessive links per page
- Score each issue by:
- Pages affected
- Traffic at risk (from GSC data if available)
- Effort to fix
- Group related issues and recommend batch fixes.
- Output a prioritized fix list.
Output
Prioritized technical issue report with affected URLs, impact estimate, and recommended fix.
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.