The Technical Foundation Check

Start here on every new site, no exceptions. A noindex tag left on by accident or a broken canonical can quietly cap your rankings no matter how good the content is. Fix this before touching anything else.

Run a technical foundation audit for [DOMAIN].

Data I'm giving you:
A Screaming Frog crawl export (or paste a list of URLs, titles, and status codes)
A Google Search Console coverage export, if I have one

Go through this in order and flag severity as CRITICAL, HIGH, MEDIUM, or LOW:
1. Pages that are accidentally noindexed
2. Canonical tags pointing to the wrong URL, or canonical chains
3. Duplicate title tags and meta descriptions
4. Broken internal links and pages with zero internal links pointing to them
5. Redirect chains longer than two hops
6. Sitemap accuracy, pages listed that 404, important pages missing from it entirely

For every issue, name the exact URLs affected and the specific fix. Don't guess at a fix without pointing to the page it applies to.
If something looks like it could be intentional (a noindex on a thank you page, for example), flag it as "check before touching" instead of calling it an error.

Save the output as a short table, CRITICAL issues first.

The Cannibalization Finder

This one gets skipped constantly and it shouldn’t. Once a site has more than a hundred pages, it’s almost guaranteed that two or three of them are quietly targeting the same keyword and splitting the ranking signal between them. Fixing this alone can move rankings without writing a single new word.

Find keyword cannibalization on [DOMAIN].

Paste: a full list of URLs with their target keyword, title tag, and H1
Paste: Search Console query data showing which URLs rank for which terms

Look for:
Two or more pages ranking for the same primary keyword or a very close variant
Pages where Search Console shows impressions for a keyword under a URL that clearly wasn't built for that term
Pages with near-identical titles or H1s targeting overlapping intent

For each conflict found, recommend one of three actions:
Merge the weaker page into the stronger one and 301 redirect
Differentiate them by rewriting one page toward a clearly different search intent
Pick a clear winner and deindex or redirect the other

Rank the conflicts by how much combined traffic or impressions they involve, biggest opportunity first.

The Content Decay Audit

Pages that ranked well two years ago don’t stay there by default. Competitors publish something newer, the search intent shifts, or the page just goes stale. This workflow finds the posts that are quietly bleeding traffic before you notice in a quarterly report.

Run a content decay audit for [DOMAIN].

Paste: Search Console performance data comparing this quarter to the same quarter last year, sorted by click difference
Paste, if available: the publish date and last-updated date for each page

For every page that lost meaningful clicks or impressions:
Check whether the ranking position dropped, the click-through rate dropped, or both
Note if a competitor page now ranks above it for the same query, and if so what that page does differently
Classify each losing page into one of four buckets: Refresh (topic still matters, needs new information), Merge (overlaps with another page on the site), Redirect (outdated and better handled elsewhere), or Leave alone (small dip, not worth touching yet)

Output a prioritized list: page, traffic lost, recommended action, and the one specific change that would matter most for that page.

The SERP-Aware Content Brief

A brief that only matches what’s already ranking will only ever tie with it, never beat it. This forces the brief to name the specific gap the top results leave open.

Build a content brief for the keyword: [KEYWORD]

Paste the current top ten ranking pages for this term, or a summary of what each one covers.

Step 1: For each result, note the search intent, the content format, and roughly how deep it goes.
Step 2: What do all five of the top pages cover in common? That's the table stakes, it has to be in the brief.
Step 3: What does none of them cover well? That's the actual opportunity.
Step 4: Build the structure. An H1 that answers the query directly rather than just restating the keyword. Four to six H2s for the real sub-questions a reader has. A short, direct answer in the first hundred words that could stand alone if quoted by an AI search result. A small FAQ section covering genuine edge cases, not the same questions as the H2s reworded.
Step 5: Before finalizing, check whether this brief only matches the competition or actually beats it. If it only matches, sharpen it.

Output one writer-ready brief: keyword, intent, target word count, full structure, and a one-line internal linking suggestion.

The Schema and AI-Citability Audit

This is the highest-leverage workflow on this list for 2026. It’s not just about ranking in Google anymore, it’s about whether an AI answer engine can actually lift a sentence from your page and cite it. Most sites are invisible here without knowing it.

Run a schema and AI-citability audit for [URL or a list of URLs].

Step 1, schema check: What structured data currently exists on the page? Article, Product, Service, FAQPage, LocalBusiness, or none at all. Validate any existing JSON-LD for errors. Tell me what schema type this page should have based on its content, if something is missing.

Step 2, citability check: For the query this page is meant to answer, is there a direct, quotable answer inside the first hundred words? Is the language specific and factual, or vague marketing copy that gives an AI nothing concrete to lift? Would a system summarizing this topic have a clean sentence to pull from this exact page?

Step 3, generate what's missing: for any schema type identified as missing, write the actual JSON-LD, ready to paste in.

Output: a short list, schema to add with the code, and a rewritten opening paragraph for any page that failed the citability check.

Check schema types against schema.org, and validate any JSON-LD with Google’s Rich Results Test before pushing it live.

The Trust Signal Deep Dive

This deserves its own pass, not a bullet point inside another audit. It matters on every site, and it matters most on anything touching health, money, or legal advice, where Google is actively looking for signs that real, qualified people stand behind the content.

Run a trust signal audit for [DOMAIN].

Paste the key pages: homepage, about page, a few service or article pages, author bio pages if they exist.

Check for:
Is it clear who wrote or is responsible for each page, and is that person's relevant background actually shown, not just a name?
Is there a visible published date and, more importantly, a last-updated date on time-sensitive content?
Are factual claims backed by a real, checkable source, or stated with no citation at all?
Do the About and Contact pages give a real address, real credentials, and a way to verify the business is what it claims to be?
For any statistic or outcome claim on the site, is there a source, or does it read as an unverifiable number?

Output: a scored checklist per page, and the three highest-impact trust fixes for the whole site, ranked by how much they'd matter to someone deciding whether to trust this business.

Competitor Gap to Content Calendar

A gap analysis on its own is just a spreadsheet nobody opens again. Turning it into a dated calendar with a real publishing order is what actually gets it done.

Build a content calendar from a competitive gap analysis.

My domain: [DOMAIN]
Competitors: [LIST 2 TO 3 DOMAINS]

Step 1: Find keywords the competitors rank in the top ten for that I don't rank for at all, or rank below position 20 for. Filter to keyword difficulty under 40 and monthly volume over 200, if that data is available.
Step 2: Group the results into topic clusters, each with one pillar page and a few supporting articles.
Step 3: Score each cluster on estimated traffic potential, difficulty, and how relevant it actually is to what I offer. A high-traffic cluster with no real connection to my business ranks lower than a smaller, more relevant one.
Step 4: Sequence it into a 90 day calendar. Pillar pages publish before their supporting articles, so internal linking has somewhere to point from day one.

Output: publish date, cluster, target keyword, content type, priority score, one-line brief per piece.

Backlink Gap to Outreach List

Finding who links to your competitors but not to you is only useful if the list is actually enriched enough to send an email against. A raw domain list isn’t an outreach campaign.

Build a backlink gap outreach list.

My domain: [DOMAIN]
Competitors: [LIST 2 TO 3 DOMAINS]

Step 1: Find referring domains linking to at least one competitor but not linking to me.
Step 2: Remove anything that looks like a low-quality link farm, no real content, no organic traffic, spam-adjacent niche. Prioritize genuine topical relevance over raw authority.
Step 3: For each remaining target, note what page links to the competitor and why, guest post, resource list, comparison article, directory listing. Find a contact if one is findable.
Step 4: For each target, suggest a specific outreach angle based on why they linked to the competitor in the first place, a more current resource, a different angle, or something the competitor's page doesn't cover.

Output as a table: target domain, linking page, why they linked to the competitor, contact if found, suggested angle, priority.

The SEO to Conversion Bridge

Traffic that doesn’t convert isn’t a win, it’s a number on a slide. This is the workflow most SEO reports skip entirely, and it’s usually the fastest way to make a flat month look like a good one.

Connect SEO traffic to actual conversions for [DOMAIN].

Paste: Search Console landing page data, and conversion or goal data from Analytics for the same pages, over the same period.

Step 1: Rank pages by organic traffic, then show conversion rate next to each. Flag the biggest gaps, high traffic pages converting far below the site average.
Step 2: For each flagged page, look at what's actually on it. Is there a clear, single call to action? Does the page match the intent of the keyword bringing people there, or is there a mismatch between what someone searched for and what the page delivers?
Step 3: Suggest one specific, testable change per page, not a vague "improve the CTA," but the actual wording, placement, or content change to try.
Step 4: Flag any page getting real traffic but zero conversions at all, that's usually an intent mismatch worth fixing before anything else.

Output: a short table, page, traffic, conversion rate, the one change to test first.

The Report Someone Actually Reads

A report packed with every metric available gets skimmed, not read. This forces the report to lead with the one number that matters and translate the rest into plain language.

Build the monthly SEO report for [DOMAIN or client name].

Paste: Search Console export for this period versus last period, ranking tracker data if I have it, and a list of anything published this month.

Step 1: What's the single most important number this period, organic traffic up or down, and by how much. Lead with that, not a wall of metrics.
Step 2: For any real change, connect it to a likely cause, a page that was published, a technical fix, or a competitor move if I know of one.
Step 3: Which published pieces are gaining traction, which are flat, which underperformed.
Step 4: Three specific actions for next month, each tied to an expected outcome, not "continue optimizing."

Output: a client-readable summary under 400 words, plain language, no jargon. Put the full numbers in a separate appendix for anyone who wants them.