technical-seo-checker

Overview of technical-seo-checker skill

What technical-seo-checker actually does

technical-seo-checker is a structured audit skill for diagnosing technical SEO problems that hurt crawling, indexing, site speed, mobile usability, redirects, and Core Web Vitals. It is designed for cases like “my site is slow,” “Google cannot find my pages,” “why did rankings drop after a migration,” or “are canonical and robots rules blocking discovery.”

Who should use this skill

This technical-seo-checker skill is best for:

• SEO consultants and in-house SEOs doing repeatable audits
• developers who need an SEO-aware troubleshooting checklist
• content or growth teams that suspect technical issues are limiting page performance
• site owners who want a prioritized report instead of a loose brainstorm

If you need implementation code for one platform only, this is not primarily a framework-specific setup guide. It is stronger as an audit and diagnosis workflow.

The real job-to-be-done

Users usually do not want “more SEO ideas.” They want to find the small set of technical blockers with the highest search impact, explain why they matter, and turn them into fixes a developer or stakeholder can act on. technical-seo-checker is useful because it pushes the audit toward concrete checks such as robots.txt rules, sitemap quality, HTTP status behavior, indexability, redirect patterns, and performance metrics.

Why this skill is more useful than a generic prompt

A generic prompt often produces a vague “check your sitemap, improve speed, add canonicals” list. technical-seo-checker is more install-worthy because the repository includes supporting references and output templates that make the audit more consistent:

• references/http-status-codes.md for SEO-relevant response handling
• references/robots-txt-reference.md for crawl-control diagnosis
• references/technical-audit-example.md for report shape and depth
• references/technical-audit-templates.md for reusable audit sections

That matters if you want less guesswork and a report format you can reuse across sites.

Best-fit scope and important limits

technical-seo-checker is strongest for site-health review and issue triage, not for:

• backlink analysis
• topical authority planning
• detailed keyword research
• writing SEO content

It can support technical foundations for SEO Content, but it is not a content optimization skill by itself. Use it when content may be underperforming because the site cannot be crawled, rendered, loaded, or indexed correctly.

How to Use technical-seo-checker skill

Install context for technical-seo-checker

The repository does not expose a skill-specific install command inside SKILL.md, so users typically add it from the parent repo in their skills-compatible environment, then invoke the technical-seo-checker skill by intent. If your environment supports marketplace-style installs, start from the repository root skill source and select this skill slug:

• repo: aaron-he-zhu/seo-geo-claude-skills
• skill path: optimize/technical-seo-checker

Also note the stated compatibility in SKILL.md:

• Claude Code ≥1.0
• skills.sh marketplace
• ClawHub marketplace
• Vercel Labs skills ecosystem
• optional MCP/network access for SEO tool integrations

Read these files first

For the fastest understanding of technical-seo-checker usage, read in this order:

1. optimize/technical-seo-checker/SKILL.md
2. optimize/technical-seo-checker/references/technical-audit-example.md
3. optimize/technical-seo-checker/references/technical-audit-templates.md
4. optimize/technical-seo-checker/references/robots-txt-reference.md
5. optimize/technical-seo-checker/references/http-status-codes.md

This path shows trigger conditions first, then expected output shape, then the decision references used during diagnosis.

What input the skill needs

technical-seo-checker works much better when you provide specific audit targets instead of “check my site.” Strong inputs usually include:

• domain or exact URLs
• whether the issue is sitewide or page-specific
• symptom type: slow pages, deindexing, crawl waste, mobile failure, migration loss
• recent changes: redesign, CDN move, JS rendering changes, redirect rollout
• tools or evidence you already have: Search Console, PageSpeed, server headers, crawl exports
• preferred output: executive summary, dev ticket list, full audit report

Without this context, the model can still produce a checklist, but it will be less diagnostic.

Turn a rough goal into a strong prompt

Weak prompt:

• “Audit my site SEO.”

Better prompt:

• “Use technical-seo-checker to audit example.com for indexing and performance issues. Focus on robots.txt, sitemap quality, canonicals, status codes, redirect chains, mobile friendliness, and Core Web Vitals. Prioritize issues by SEO impact and implementation effort. Output a report with findings, evidence, likely root cause, and recommended fixes.”

Best prompt:

• “Use technical-seo-checker on example.com. Context: traffic dropped after migrating from www to non-www two weeks ago. Main symptoms: some pages disappeared from Google, mobile LCP is poor, and category filters may be creating crawl waste. Check redirect behavior, canonical consistency, robots.txt, sitemap inclusion, indexability, HTTP status codes, and Core Web Vitals. Give me: 1) top 5 likely causes, 2) pages or patterns to verify first, 3) a developer-ready fix list, and 4) a concise stakeholder summary.”

What good technical-seo-checker usage looks like

The skill is most useful when you ask it to produce:

• a prioritized audit, not a flat checklist
• evidence-backed findings, not generic advice
• issue severity plus likely business impact
• fix recommendations grouped by effort and urgency
• next-step verification actions after each fix

This mirrors the repository’s example/template structure and produces something a team can actually use.

Suggested workflow for real audits

A practical technical-seo-checker usage flow:

1. define the symptom and scope
2. audit crawl/index controls first: robots.txt, sitemap, canonicals, noindex
3. inspect status codes and redirects
4. check performance and Core Web Vitals
5. review mobile experience and site architecture
6. prioritize by search impact and fixability
7. convert findings into tickets or implementation tasks
8. re-run the audit after changes

This order prevents teams from spending time on micro-optimizations before fixing indexation blockers.

Use the reference files as decision aids

The support files are not filler. They materially improve audit quality:

• robots-txt-reference.md helps distinguish intentional blocking from accidental overblocking
• http-status-codes.md helps classify redirect misuse, soft-error patterns, and response behavior
• technical-audit-example.md shows how detailed the final output should be
• technical-audit-templates.md helps keep reports complete and comparable across sites

If you skip these, you may still get a usable answer, but the audit will be less standardized.

Where technical-seo-checker helps SEO Content teams

technical-seo-checker for SEO Content is most helpful when content exists but underperforms because technical foundations are weak. Good examples:

• important landing pages are blocked or noindexed
• duplicate URL versions split signals
• slow mobile pages suppress engagement and crawling
• faceted navigation creates crawl waste that hides priority pages
• XML sitemaps do not reflect the pages you actually want indexed

In other words, use this skill to clear the path for content to be discovered and served well.

Common adoption blocker: expecting live crawling by default

A common mistake is assuming technical-seo-checker automatically behaves like a full crawler or a dedicated SEO SaaS platform. The skill is primarily a structured auditing workflow. Its output quality depends on what the model can fetch, what context you provide, and whether your environment allows network/tool access. If you need large-scale crawl coverage, pair it with exported crawl data or external tool results.

technical-seo-checker skill FAQ

Is technical-seo-checker good for beginners

Yes, if you can describe the problem clearly. The templates and references make the workflow more beginner-friendly than an empty prompt. But it still helps to know basic SEO concepts like indexing, redirects, and canonicals so you can validate recommendations.

What makes this different from asking an AI for a technical audit

The main difference is structure. The technical-seo-checker skill gives the model an audit frame, trigger conditions, references, and report templates. That reduces vague advice and increases the odds of getting a usable audit document rather than a brainstorming list.

When should I not use technical-seo-checker

Do not choose technical-seo-checker if your main need is:

• keyword clustering
• content briefs
• link building strategy
• local SEO citation work
• analytics attribution analysis

It is also a weaker fit if you need a JavaScript-rendering lab or enterprise crawler replacement.

Does technical-seo-checker require external tools

Not strictly, but better evidence improves the result. The skill can work with fetched pages and supplied context. It becomes more reliable when paired with data from Search Console, crawl exports, PageSpeed Insights, server headers, or migration URL maps.

Can I use technical-seo-checker during site migrations

Yes. It is a strong fit for migration QA because it covers redirect behavior, canonical consistency, crawlability, and indexability checks that often break during URL, domain, or platform moves.

Is technical-seo-checker useful for a single page

Yes, especially for diagnosing a high-value page with slow performance, canonical confusion, bad status handling, or mobile issues. Just specify the exact URL and why that page matters.

How to Improve technical-seo-checker skill

Give tighter scope before asking for fixes

The fastest way to improve technical-seo-checker output is to narrow the problem:

• one domain or subdomain
• a page set or template type
• one symptom cluster
• a known time window after a change

“Audit example.com/blog/ after our CMS migration” will outperform “check my SEO.”

Provide evidence, not just complaints

Better inputs produce better technical diagnosis. Include:

• sample URLs with expected vs actual behavior
• current canonical tags
• redirect examples
• robots.txt contents
• sitemap URLs
• PageSpeed or CWV results
• Search Console symptoms like excluded, discovered-not-indexed, or duplicate without user-selected canonical

This helps the skill move from generic best practices to likely root causes.

Ask for prioritization in the output

Many audits fail because they are too long and flat. Tell technical-seo-checker to label each issue by:

• severity
• estimated SEO impact
• implementation effort
• confidence level
• owner: SEO, dev, content, platform

That turns the first draft into something teams can act on.

Watch for common failure modes

Typical weak-output patterns include:

• generic recommendations without evidence
• no distinction between crawl, index, and ranking issues
• performance advice without page-type context
• assuming all duplicate URLs should be blocked rather than canonically consolidated
• treating every warning as equally urgent

If you see these, refine the prompt and provide concrete site evidence.

Iterate after the first audit

A good technical-seo-checker guide in practice is two-pass:

1. first pass for issue discovery and prioritization
2. second pass for validation, implementation detail, and retesting steps

Useful follow-up prompt:

• “Re-run technical-seo-checker focusing only on the high-severity issues. For each, give a verification method, exact pages affected, and what success should look like after the fix.”

Improve technical-seo-checker for SEO Content workflows

If your goal is technical-seo-checker for SEO Content, ask the skill to connect technical findings to content outcomes:

• which page groups are hardest to crawl
• which content hubs are slow on mobile
• whether canonicals suppress intended landing pages
• whether parameter URLs dilute internal linking signals
• whether sitemap coverage matches strategic content

That makes the audit more useful for editorial and growth teams, not just developers.

Build reusable prompt templates from the repo

The repository already includes templates and a worked example. Use them to create your own standard prompt for audits, migrations, or incident response. This reduces output variance across clients or internal projects and is one of the strongest reasons to adopt technical-seo-checker instead of relying on ad hoc prompting.