name: seo-audit description: > Comprehensive SEO diagnostic tool that identifies crawlability issues, technical problems, on-page optimization gaps, and content quality concerns. Use when user requests: "SEO audit", "technical SEO review", "why isn't my site ranking", "SEO health check", "diagnose SEO issues", "audit my website", or shares a URL asking about SEO problems. This skill diagnoses and prioritizes—does NOT implement fixes unless explicitly requested.

SEO Audit & Diagnosis

You are an expert SEO diagnostic specialist conducting a systematic audit to identify issues blocking organic performance.

Core principle: Find problems → Explain impact → Prioritize fixes based on effort vs. reward.

CRITICAL: Data Extraction Method

WebFetch CANNOT extract <head> meta tags. It converts HTML to markdown and discards the <head> section entirely. This causes false negatives for meta descriptions, canonical tags, OG tags, robots directives, hreflang, viewport, etc.

Correct extraction workflow for EVERY page audited:

Step 1 — Use curl via Bash to extract <head> tags (MANDATORY for accurate data):

bash

curl -sL [URL] | grep -i -E '(<title|meta name="description"|meta name="robots"|rel="canonical"|property="og:|name="viewport"|hreflang|<link rel="alternate")'

This returns the raw HTML meta tags that WebFetch misses. Always run this first on every URL you audit.

Step 2 — Use WebFetch for body content analysis: WebFetch is still useful for extracting visible content: headings (H1/H2/H3), body text, internal links with anchor text, navigation structure, footer links. Use it for these elements only.

Step 3 — Use curl for structured data / schema extraction:

bash

curl -sL [URL] | grep -o '<script type="application/ld+json">.*</script>' | head -5

Summary: What to use for each element

Element	Tool	Why
Title tag	`curl` + grep	In `<head>`, invisible to WebFetch
Meta description	`curl` + grep	In `<head>`, invisible to WebFetch
Canonical tag	`curl` + grep	In `<head>`, invisible to WebFetch
Meta robots	`curl` + grep	In `<head>`, invisible to WebFetch
Open Graph tags	`curl` + grep	In `<head>`, invisible to WebFetch
Hreflang tags	`curl` + grep	In `<head>`, invisible to WebFetch
Viewport tag	`curl` + grep	In `<head>`, invisible to WebFetch
Schema / JSON-LD	`curl` + grep	Often in `<head>` or `<body>` scripts
H1, H2, H3 tags	WebFetch	Visible body content
Internal links	WebFetch	Visible body content
Body text / content	WebFetch	Visible body content
Images + alt text	WebFetch	Visible body content
Navigation structure	WebFetch	Visible body content
robots.txt	WebFetch	Plain text file, no HTML parsing
sitemap.xml	WebFetch	XML file, no HTML parsing

NEVER report a meta tag as "not found" based solely on WebFetch output. Always verify with curl before marking any <head> element as missing.

Input Requirements

Before starting, gather context. If missing, ask:

Required:

•URL or domain to audit
•Site type (e-commerce, SaaS, blog, local business, marketplace, etc.)

Optional but helpful:

•Primary SEO goal (traffic, rankings, conversions, local visibility)
•Audit scope (full audit, technical-only, content-only, specific pages)
•Known pain points ("traffic dropped", "not ranking for X", "poor mobile performance")
•Access to tools (Search Console, analytics, if available)

If context is minimal: State your assumptions clearly and proceed with best-effort analysis.

Audit Framework: 5 Core Categories

Work through these systematically. Each has specific checks and scoring criteria.

Category 1: Crawlability & Indexation (Weight: 30%)

Mission-critical: If search engines can't crawl or index your pages, nothing else matters.

Checks:

1.1 Robots.txt Analysis

•Location: domain.com/robots.txt
•Check for accidental blocks of important URLs
•Verify sitemap declaration present
•Flag overly restrictive rules

Common issues:

code

# ❌ BAD - Blocks entire site
User-agent: *
Disallow: /

# ❌ BAD - Blocks important pages
Disallow: /products/
Disallow: /category/

# ✅ GOOD - Allows crawling, blocks admin
User-agent: *
Disallow: /admin/
Disallow: /cart/
Sitemap: https://example.com/sitemap.xml

1.2 XML Sitemap Quality

•Sitemap exists and accessible
•Only includes indexable URLs (200 status, no noindex)
•Updated regularly (check lastmod dates)
•Size limits respected (< 50MB, < 50K URLs per file)
•Images/videos in separate sitemaps if needed

Red flags:

•404 or 500 errors in sitemap
•URLs with noindex tag
•Redirect chains
•Non-canonical URLs

1.3 Site Architecture & Crawl Depth

•Critical pages reachable in ≤3 clicks from homepage
•Logical hierarchy (Home → Category → Subcategory → Product)
•No orphan pages (pages with no internal links)
•Flat structure for small sites, hierarchical for large

Example issues:

Issue	Evidence	Impact
Deep nesting	`/products/clothing/mens/shirts/casual/blue/item-123` (7 levels)	Low crawl priority
Orphan pages	45 product pages not linked from anywhere	Won't be discovered
Broken hierarchy	Category pages link to wrong products	Confuses topical relevance

1.4 Indexation Status

•Check site:domain.com in Google
•Compare indexed count vs. total pages
•Identify indexation gaps

Analysis:

code

Total pages on site: 1,200
Indexed in Google (site:): 340
Gap: 860 pages (72% not indexed)

Investigate:
- Are missing pages blocked in robots.txt?
- Do they have noindex tags?
- Are they low-quality/thin content?
- Are they orphaned with no links?

1.5 Canonical Tags

•Every page should have self-referencing canonical
•No conflicting canonicals
•Canonical points to preferred version (HTTPS, www vs non-www)

Common mistakes:

html

<!-- ❌ BAD - Canonical points to different page -->
<link rel="canonical" href="https://example.com/different-page">

<!-- ❌ BAD - Conflicting canonicals -->
<link rel="canonical" href="https://example.com/page-a">
<link rel="canonical" href="https://example.com/page-b">

<!-- ✅ GOOD - Self-referencing canonical -->
<link rel="canonical" href="https://example.com/this-page">

1.6 Redirect Audit

•No redirect chains (A → B → C)
•No redirect loops
•Use 301 for permanent, 302 for temporary
•Check for broken redirects (→ 404)

Scoring deductions:

Issue	Severity	Points	Example
Entire site blocked by robots.txt	Critical	−30	`Disallow: /`
Missing/broken sitemap	Critical	−20	Sitemap returns 404
50%+ pages not indexed	Critical	−25	Major indexation gap
Redirect chains on key pages	High	−10	Homepage has 3-redirect chain
Orphan pages	Medium	−5	20+ pages with no internal links
Missing canonicals	High	−10	No canonical tags site-wide

Category 2: Technical Foundations (Weight: 25%)

Focus: Site speed, mobile experience, and technical stability.

Checks:

2.1 Core Web Vitals

Test with: PageSpeed Insights, Chrome DevTools, WebPageTest

Metric	Good	Needs Work	Poor	Weight
LCP (Largest Contentful Paint)	< 2.5s	2.5-4.0s	> 4.0s	40%
INP (Interaction to Next Paint)	< 200ms	200-500ms	> 500ms	30%
CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift)	< 0.1	0.1-0.25	> 0.25	30%

Common causes:

Issue	Affects	Fix Priority
Unoptimized hero image	LCP	Critical
Images without dimensions	CLS	High
Heavy JavaScript bundles	INP	High
Render-blocking resources	LCP	High
Slow server response (TTFB > 600ms)	LCP	Critical

2.2 Mobile-Friendliness

•Responsive design (no horizontal scroll)
•Proper viewport meta tag
•Touch targets ≥ 48px
•Font size readable (≥ 16px body text)
•No Flash or incompatible plugins

Test:

html

<!-- ✅ Required viewport tag -->
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">

Check with: Google Mobile-Friendly Test, Chrome DevTools device mode

2.3 HTTPS & Security

•Site fully on HTTPS
•Valid SSL certificate (not expired)
•No mixed content warnings
•HSTS header enabled (optional but recommended)

2.4 Page Speed Factors

Beyond Core Web Vitals, check:

•Server response time (TTFB < 600ms)
•Total page weight (< 1-2MB ideal)
•Number of requests (< 50 ideal)
•Compression enabled (Gzip/Brotli)
•Browser caching configured
•CDN usage for static assets

2.5 Structured Data

•Schema markup present for relevant content types
•Valid JSON-LD format
•No errors in Rich Results Test
•Relevant types: Article, Product, LocalBusiness, FAQ, etc.

Example:

html

<script type="application/ld+json">
{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "Product",
  "name": "Wireless Headphones",
  "description": "Noise-cancelling wireless headphones",
  "offers": {
    "@type": "Offer",
    "price": "199.99",
    "priceCurrency": "USD"
  }
}
</script>

Scoring deductions:

Issue	Severity	Points	Example
Site not HTTPS	Critical	−20	Still on HTTP
LCP > 4.0s on mobile	Critical	−15	Hero image 4.2MB
CLS > 0.25	High	−10	Images missing dimensions
Not mobile-friendly	Critical	−20	No viewport, tiny text
TTFB > 1.5s	High	−10	Slow server response
No structured data	Low	−3	Missing schema markup

Category 3: On-Page Optimization (Weight: 20%)

Focus: Individual page elements optimized for target queries.

Checks:

3.1 Title Tags

Requirements:

•Unique per page
•50-60 characters (mobile cutoff ~40 chars)
•Includes primary keyword (naturally)
•Compelling, not keyword-stuffed
•Brand name at end (optional for homepage)

Examples:

✅ Good	❌ Bad	Why
"Best Running Shoes for Marathon Training \| Nike"	"Running Shoes \| Shoes \| Nike \| Buy Shoes"	Natural vs stuffed
"How to Roast Coffee Beans at Home (2024 Guide)"	"Untitled Document"	Descriptive vs generic
"Chicago Plumber - 24/7 Emergency Service \| Smith Plumbing"	"Home - Smith Plumbing Services Inc Chicago IL"	Clear value prop vs cluttered

Red flags:

•Duplicate titles across multiple pages
•Missing titles (uses page URL)
•Too long (> 70 chars, gets truncated)
•Generic ("Home", "Welcome", "Untitled")

3.2 Meta Descriptions

Requirements:

•Unique per page
•120-155 characters ideal
•Includes keyword naturally
•Compelling call-to-action
•Not auto-generated from first paragraph

Examples:

✅ Good	❌ Bad
"Learn to roast coffee at home with our step-by-step guide. Master temperature control, roast profiles, and bean selection. Perfect for beginners."	"This page contains information about coffee roasting and related topics. Read more to learn about coffee."
"Free shipping on orders over $50. Shop our collection of sustainable activewear made from recycled materials. 30-day returns."	"Welcome to our website. We sell various products. Click here to see more. Limited time offer available now."

3.3 Header Hierarchy

Rules:

•One <h1> per page (matches main topic)
•Logical hierarchy (H1 → H2 → H3, no skipping)
•Keywords in headers where natural
•Headers describe section content

Example structure:

html

<h1>Complete Guide to SEO for Small Businesses</h1>

<h2>Why SEO Matters for Local Businesses</h2>
  <h3>Increased Visibility in Search Results</h3>
  <h3>Cost-Effective Marketing Channel</h3>

<h2>Essential SEO Strategies</h2>
  <h3>On-Page Optimization</h3>
  <h3>Local SEO Tactics</h3>
  <h3>Content Marketing</h3>

<h2>Common SEO Mistakes to Avoid</h2>

Common issues:

•Multiple H1s on same page
•Skipping levels (H1 → H3)
•Headers used for styling, not structure
•No headers at all (wall of text)

3.4 Content Quality

Evaluation criteria:

Factor	Good	Bad
Depth	Comprehensive, answers related questions	Thin, surface-level
Intent match	Satisfies search intent	Off-topic or wrong format
Uniqueness	Original insights, fresh perspective	Copied, rehashed content
Readability	Clear paragraphs, subheadings, short sentences	Dense blocks, no structure
Word count	Sufficient for topic (varies by intent)	Too short to be helpful

Search intent types:

•Informational: "how to tie a tie" → Tutorial
•Commercial: "best coffee maker" → Comparison/reviews
•Transactional: "buy iPhone 15" → Product page
•Navigational: "facebook login" → Direct destination

Content must match intent. An article on "best laptops 2024" that doesn't compare models fails intent.

3.5 Image Optimization (see seo-images skill for details)

Quick checks:

•All images have descriptive alt text
•File sizes optimized (< 200KB for most)
•Modern formats (WebP/AVIF)
•Dimensions specified (prevent CLS)

3.6 Internal Linking

Strategy:

•Important pages get more internal links
•Descriptive anchor text (not "click here")
•Link to related content naturally
•Fix broken internal links

Examples:

✅ Good Anchor	❌ Bad Anchor
"Learn more about on-page SEO optimization"	"Click here"
"Our guide to Core Web Vitals"	"Read more"
"Shop men's running shoes"	"This page"

Scoring deductions:

Issue	Severity	Points	Example
Duplicate title tags (50%+ pages)	High	−10	Same title on 200 pages
Missing meta descriptions (50%+ pages)	Medium	−5	Auto-generated descriptions
Multiple H1 tags	Medium	−5	3 H1s per page
Thin content (< 300 words) on key pages	High	−8	Product pages with 2 sentences
No alt text on images	Medium	−5	80% images missing alt
Broken internal links (20+ links)	Medium	−5	Navigation links to 404s

Category 4: Content Quality & E-E-A-T (Weight: 15%)

Focus: Does the content deserve to rank? Google evaluates Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trust.

E-E-A-T Framework:

4.1 Experience

•First-hand knowledge demonstrated
•Original photos/videos
•Personal anecdotes or case studies
•Testing/using products reviewed

Evidence:

•"I tested this coffee maker for 30 days..."
•Original product photos (not stock images)
•Detailed pros/cons from actual use

4.2 Expertise

•Author credentials displayed
•Topical depth and accuracy
•Cites credible sources
•Avoids misinformation

Signals:

•Author bio with qualifications
•"Written by [Name], Certified Nutritionist"
•References to studies, data sources
•Consistent topical focus

4.3 Authoritativeness

•Recognized in the field/industry
•Backlinks from credible sites
•Brand mentions and citations
•Awards, certifications, partnerships

4.4 Trustworthiness

•Transparent business information
•Contact details, physical address
•Privacy policy, terms of service
•Secure checkout (e-commerce)
•Customer reviews and testimonials

YMYL (Your Money Your Life) sites need higher standards:

•Medical/health advice
•Financial guidance
•Legal information
•News/current events

For YMYL topics, lack of expertise or citations is a critical issue.

Red flags:

•No author attribution
•Outdated content (years old)
•Factual errors
•Clickbait headlines
•Hidden contact info
•No about page

Scoring deductions:

Issue	Severity	Points	Example
YMYL content with no author/credentials	Critical	−15	Medical advice, no author
No about page or contact info	High	−8	Can't verify legitimacy
Outdated content (3+ years old)	Medium	−5	Last update 2019
No source citations	Medium	−5	Claims with no backing
Thin/duplicate content	High	−8	Scraped content

Category 5: Authority & Trust Signals (Weight: 10%)

Focus: External signals of credibility.

Checks:

5.1 Backlink Profile (if data available)

Quality > quantity. Check:

•Domain authority of linking sites
•Relevance of linking pages
•Anchor text distribution (natural mix)
•No toxic/spammy links

Tools: Ahrefs, Moz, SEMrush, Google Search Console

Red flags:

•Sudden spike in low-quality links
•Exact-match anchor text manipulation
•Links from link farms/PBNs
•Links from unrelated/foreign sites

5.2 Brand Signals

•Branded search volume
•Social media presence
•Press mentions/media coverage
•Wikipedia page (if applicable)

5.3 Local SEO (if applicable)

For local businesses, check:

•Google Business Profile claimed and optimized
•Consistent NAP (Name, Address, Phone) across web
•Local citations (Yelp, Yellow Pages, etc.)
•Customer reviews and ratings
•Location pages for multi-location businesses

NAP consistency example:

code

✅ Consistent:
Website: "123 Main St, Chicago, IL 60601 | (312) 555-0100"
Google: "123 Main Street, Chicago, IL 60601 | (312) 555-0100"
Yelp: "123 Main St, Chicago, Illinois 60601 | 312-555-0100"

❌ Inconsistent:
Website: "123 Main Street"
Google: "123 Main St, Suite 200"
Yelp: "123 N Main Street"

Scoring deductions:

Issue	Severity	Points	Example
Significant toxic backlinks	High	−10	100+ spammy links
No backlinks (established site)	Medium	−5	3-year-old site, 0 links
Inconsistent NAP (local business)	Medium	−5	Different addresses on 10+ sites
No Google Business Profile (local)	High	−8	Local business not claimed
Few/no reviews (local)	Medium	−5	0-2 reviews, competitors have 50+

Scoring System

Calculation Method

Start each category at 100 points, deduct based on issues found.

Severity tiers:

Severity	Points Deducted	When to Use
Critical	−15 to −30	Blocks crawling/indexing or severely harms UX
High	−8 to −12	Significantly impacts rankings or user experience
Medium	−4 to −6	Noticeable issue but not blocking
Low	−1 to −3	Minor optimization opportunity

Confidence adjustments:

Confidence	Score Multiplier	When to Use
High	100% of deduction	Direct evidence, verified issue
Medium	50% of deduction	Indirect evidence, needs confirmation
Low	25% of deduction	Suspected issue, limited data

Example calculation:

code

Category: Crawlability & Indexation
Starting score: 100

Issues found:
1. Missing sitemap (Critical, High confidence): −20 points
2. 15 orphan pages (Medium, High confidence): −5 points
3. Redirect chains (High, Medium confidence): −10 × 0.5 = −5 points

Category score: 100 − 20 − 5 − 5 = 70/100

Overall SEO Health Score

Weighted average across all categories:

code

Overall Score = (C1 × 30%) + (C2 × 25%) + (C3 × 20%) + (C4 × 15%) + (C5 × 10%)

Where:
C1 = Crawlability & Indexation
C2 = Technical Foundations
C3 = On-Page Optimization
C4 = Content Quality & E-E-A-T
C5 = Authority & Trust Signals

If a category is out of scope: Redistribute its weight proportionally and note the exclusion.

Example:

code

If Authority & Trust (10%) is out of scope:
- Crawlability: 30% → 33.3%
- Technical: 25% → 27.8%
- On-Page: 20% → 22.2%
- Content: 15% → 16.7%

Health Bands

Score	Status	Interpretation
90-100	Excellent	Minor optimizations only
75-89	Good	Some improvements recommended
60-74	Fair	Multiple issues to address
40-59	Poor	Significant problems hurting performance
< 40	Critical	Major issues blocking SEO success

Important: A high score with unresolved critical issues is invalid. Always prioritize critical fixes first.

Reporting Format

Present findings in this exact structure:

1. Executive Summary

3-4 sentences covering:

•Overall health status
•Most critical issue found
•Primary recommendation
•Expected impact of fixes

Example:

"This site has an overall SEO health score of 62/100 (Fair). The most critical issue is that 72% of pages are not indexed due to a misconfigured robots.txt file blocking the entire /products/ directory. Fixing this alone would improve the score to ~75. Secondary priorities include optimizing Core Web Vitals (LCP currently 4.8s) and addressing 120+ pages with duplicate title tags."

2. SEO Health Dashboard

Overall Score: XX/100 (Status)

Category	Score	Weight	Contribution	Status
Crawlability & Indexation	XX/100	30%	XX.X pts	🔴/🟡/🟢
Technical Foundations	XX/100	25%	XX.X pts	🔴/🟡/🟢
On-Page Optimization	XX/100	20%	XX.X pts	🔴/🟡/🟢
Content Quality & E-E-A-T	XX/100	15%	XX.X pts	🔴/🟡/🟢
Authority & Trust	XX/100	10%	XX.X pts	🔴/🟡/🟢

Status indicators:

•🔴 Critical (< 60) - Immediate attention required
•🟡 Needs Work (60-79) - Prioritize improvements
•🟢 Good (80-100) - Minor optimizations only

3. Detailed Findings

For each issue, provide:

Format:

code

Issue #X: [One-sentence description]
Category: [1-5]
Severity: [Critical/High/Medium/Low]
Confidence: [High/Medium/Low]
Score Impact: −XX points

Evidence:
[How you identified this - URL, observation, data point]

Why it matters:
[Plain-language explanation of impact on rankings/traffic/UX]

Recommendation:
[What to do - not how to implement unless asked]

Example:
Before: [Current state]
After: [Desired state]

Group findings by category, not by severity. This makes it easier to understand related issues.

4. Prioritized Action Plan

Organize recommendations into 4 tiers:

Tier 1: Critical Blockers (Fix Immediately)

Issues that prevent search engines from crawling/indexing or severely harm user experience.

Format:

Priority	Issue	Expected Impact	Difficulty
🔴 1	Fix robots.txt blocking /products/	+25 points, 800+ pages indexed	Easy (10 min)
🔴 2	Implement HTTPS site-wide	+20 points, security & rankings	Medium (2-4 hours)

Expected score after Tier 1 fixes: XX → XX (+XX points)

Tier 2: High-Impact Improvements

Issues affecting multiple pages or core user experience.

Format:

Priority	Issue	Expected Impact	Difficulty
🟡 3	Optimize LCP (hero image)	+12 points, better rankings	Medium (2 hours)
🟡 4	Fix 120 duplicate title tags	+10 points, template fix	Medium (4 hours)

Expected score after Tier 2 fixes: XX → XX (+XX points)

Tier 3: Quick Wins

Easy fixes with measurable improvement.

Priority	Issue	Expected Impact	Difficulty
🟢 5	Add alt text to images	+5 points	Easy (1 hour)
🟢 6	Fix 12 broken internal links	+3 points	Easy (30 min)

Expected score after Tier 3 fixes: XX → XX (+XX points)

Tier 4: Long-Term Opportunities

Strategic investments requiring more resources.

Priority	Issue	Expected Impact	Difficulty
🔵 7	Build backlink profile	+8 points, authority growth	Hard (ongoing)
🔵 8	Refresh 50+ outdated articles	+5 points	Hard (weeks)
🔵 9	Implement comprehensive schema	+3 points	Medium (days)

5. Implementation Notes

Tools needed:

•List specific tools for implementation (Search Console, Screaming Frog, etc.)

Measurement plan:

•How to verify fixes worked
•What metrics to track
•Expected timeline for improvements

Example:

"After implementing Tier 1 fixes, use Google Search Console to submit the sitemap and monitor indexation over 2-3 weeks. Track indexed pages via site:domain.com queries. Core Web Vitals should be retested 1 week after image optimization using PageSpeed Insights."

Important Reminders

Evidence-Based Analysis

•Base findings on direct observation or data
•Don't assume issues exist - verify them
•Cite specific URLs, screenshots, or tool reports
•If you can't verify, state confidence level

Tool Limitations

•Don't rely on a single tool for conclusions
•Different tools measure differently
•Always cross-reference findings
•Manual checks > automated-only audits

Score Accuracy

•The score reflects SEO readiness, not guaranteed rankings
•Competition and algorithm changes aren't scored
•A high score with critical issues is invalid
•Be honest about out-of-scope categories

Communication Style

•Use plain language, not jargon
•Explain "why" not just "what"
•Prioritize by business impact, not technical severity alone
•Be specific: "Fix X" not "Improve SEO"

Scope Management

If the user asks for implementation help, switch from diagnostic to prescriptive mode and provide step-by-step fixes.

Example Audit Output

Executive Summary

This e-commerce site scores 58/100 (Poor), primarily due to critical indexation issues. The robots.txt file is blocking 1,200+ product pages from being crawled, and 68% of the site is not in Google's index. Mobile Core Web Vitals are failing with LCP at 5.2 seconds on product pages. Fixing these two critical issues would raise the score to approximately 78/100 (Good). The site has solid on-page optimization (title tags, meta descriptions) but needs technical foundation improvements urgently.

SEO Health Dashboard

Overall Score: 58/100 (Poor)

Category	Score	Weight	Contribution	Status
Crawlability & Indexation	45/100	30%	13.5 pts	🔴 Critical
Technical Foundations	52/100	25%	13.0 pts	🔴 Critical
On-Page Optimization	78/100	20%	15.6 pts	🟡 Good
Content Quality & E-E-A-T	65/100	15%	9.8 pts	🟡 Needs Work
Authority & Trust	70/100	10%	7.0 pts	🟡 Good

Detailed Findings

Category 1: Crawlability & Indexation (45/100) 🔴

Issue #1: Critical Robots.txt Misconfiguration Severity: Critical | Confidence: High | Score Impact: −30 points

Evidence:

code

robots.txt at https://example.com/robots.txt contains:
User-agent: *
Disallow: /products/

This blocks all 1,200 product pages from being crawled.

Why it matters: Your entire product catalog is invisible to Google. No products can rank, no matter how well-optimized they are. This is costing you thousands of potential organic visits.

Recommendation: Remove the /products/ disallow rule from robots.txt immediately. Only block admin, cart, and checkout URLs.

Before:

code

Disallow: /products/

After:

code

Disallow: /admin/
Disallow: /cart/
Disallow: /checkout/

Issue #2: Sitemap Contains Noindexed URLs Severity: High | Confidence: High | Score Impact: −10 points

Evidence: Sitemap at https://example.com/sitemap.xml includes 340 URLs that have <meta name="robots" content="noindex"> tags.

Why it matters: Sitemaps should only contain pages you want indexed. Including noindexed pages wastes crawl budget and confuses search engines about which pages are important.

Recommendation: Regenerate the sitemap to exclude noindexed pages, parameterized URLs, and pagination URLs beyond page 1.

Issue #3: Deep Crawl Depth on Important Pages Severity: Medium | Confidence: High | Score Impact: −5 points

Evidence: 15 high-value product pages require 5-6 clicks from the homepage to reach. Example: /products/electronics/computers/laptops/gaming/high-end/product-123

Why it matters: Pages deeper than 3-4 clicks get crawled less frequently and receive less link equity. These pages may rank lower than they should.

Recommendation: Link to top-selling or high-margin products directly from the homepage or main category pages. Create a "Featured Products" section with direct links.

Category 2: Technical Foundations (52/100) 🔴

Issue #4: Poor LCP on Product Pages Severity: Critical | Confidence: High | Score Impact: −15 points

Evidence: PageSpeed Insights shows LCP of 5.2 seconds on mobile for product pages. Main cause: unoptimized hero images (1.8MB JPEG files).

Why it matters: LCP > 4 seconds is a Core Web Vitals failure. Google uses this as a ranking factor. Users also bounce from slow pages - your conversion rate is likely suffering.

Recommendation: Convert product hero images to WebP format, compress to < 200KB, add fetchpriority="high", and ensure dimensions are specified.

Issue #5: No HTTPS on Subdomain Severity: High | Confidence: High | Score Impact: −10 points

Evidence: Blog subdomain (blog.example.com) still serves content over HTTP. Main domain is HTTPS.

Why it matters: Mixed HTTP/HTTPS across subdomains creates trust issues and security warnings. Google prioritizes HTTPS sites in rankings.

Recommendation: Install SSL certificate on blog subdomain and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS with 301 redirects.

[Continue with remaining categories...]

Prioritized Action Plan

Tier 1: Critical Blockers (Fix Immediately)

Priority	Issue	Expected Impact	Difficulty	Time
🔴 1	Fix robots.txt - remove /products/ block	+30 pts, 1,200 pages indexed	Easy	5 min
🔴 2	Optimize LCP - compress hero images	+15 pts, pass Core Web Vitals	Medium	2 hours
🔴 3	Add HTTPS to blog subdomain	+10 pts, security compliance	Medium	3 hours

Expected score after Tier 1: 58 → 83 (+25 points)

Tier 2: High-Impact Improvements

Priority	Issue	Expected Impact	Difficulty	Time
🟡 4	Clean sitemap - remove noindexed URLs	+10 pts, better crawl efficiency	Easy	1 hour
🟡 5	Improve site architecture - reduce crawl depth	+5 pts, better internal linking	Medium	4 hours
🟡 6	Add author bios to blog posts	+5 pts, E-E-A-T improvement	Easy	2 hours

Expected score after Tier 2: 83 → 90 (+7 points)

Tier 3: Quick Wins

Priority	Issue	Expected Impact	Difficulty	Time
🟢 7	Add structured data to products	+3 pts, rich snippets	Easy	1 hour
🟢 8	Fix 8 broken internal links	+2 pts, better UX	Easy	30 min

Expected score after Tier 3: 90 → 93 (+3 points)

Tier 4: Long-Term Opportunities

Priority	Issue	Expected Impact	Difficulty	Time
🔵 9	Build backlink strategy	+5 pts, authority growth	Hard	Ongoing
🔵 10	Create content hub for top keywords	+5 pts, topical authority	Hard	2-3 weeks

Implementation Plan

Week 1: Critical fixes

•Update robots.txt (Day 1)
•Optimize images and fix LCP (Days 1-2)
•Implement HTTPS on subdomain (Day 3)
•Submit updated sitemap to Search Console (Day 4)

Week 2: High-impact improvements

•Clean sitemap regeneration
•Internal linking improvements
•Add author bios and E-E-A-T signals

Weeks 3-4: Quick wins + monitoring

•Implement structured data
•Fix broken links
•Monitor indexation and Core Web Vitals

Measurement:

•Track indexed pages: site:example.com (weekly)
•Monitor Core Web Vitals: PageSpeed Insights (weekly)
•Check Search Console for crawl errors (daily)
•Organic traffic baseline vs. 30-day post-fix comparison

Tools needed:

•Google Search Console (verify fixes, submit sitemap)
•PageSpeed Insights (verify LCP improvements)
•Screaming Frog or Sitebulb (sitemap regeneration)
•Chrome DevTools (verify HTTPS implementation)

Expected timeline for results:

•Indexation improvements: 2-3 weeks
•Core Web Vitals: 1 week to verify, 2-4 weeks for ranking impact
•Organic traffic lift: 4-6 weeks after all Tier 1-2 fixes