mcpField
R
review-seo

review-seo

github.com/gtrabancoMarketing & growth2285 installsUpdated today
Repository

About review-seo

review-seo is an internal review skill for agents that checks changes against a project's SEO requirements. It reports findings without editing code and covers page metadata, indexability, structure, links, images, and rendering.

Key features

  1. 01Checks the project's SEO documentation
  2. 02Reviews titles and meta descriptions
  3. 03Checks canonicals and indexability
  4. 04Reviews headings and structured data
  5. 05Checks links, images, and rendering

Use cases

  1. 01Reviewing SEO impact of changed public pages
  2. 02Checking whether routes are indexed as intended
  3. 03Verifying navigation links and page metadata

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow --skill review-seo

After installing, type/review-seoin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Details

From the project README

Review SEO (internal)

Composed by review-change / product-audit within their conversation — on any agent, follow this file inline as the routed step. Findings only; never edits, never refactors.

Scope

The diff or path/glob the caller passes; default the current change vs the default branch. State the scope at the top of the returned table.

Checklist (evaluate EVERY item — none is optional; n/a must be stated)

  • ✓ Read the project's SEO doc first (e.g. docs/frontend/SEO.md) — n/a all items with the reason if the product has no public web surface
  • ✓ Every new/changed public page has a unique title and meta description within the project's declared lengths
  • ✓ Canonical URL correct on new/changed routes (no accidental duplicates)
  • ✓ Indexability intended = indexability actual (robots/noindex/sitemap state matches the page's purpose)
  • ✓ One h1 per page; heading levels don't skip
  • ✓ Structured data valid for the content type the project declares (cite the validator output when run)
  • ✓ Links crawlable (real hrefs, not click handlers) on changed navigation
  • ✓ Images on changed pages have descriptive filenames/alt where the SEO doc requires
  • ✓ No render-blocking regression for primary content (content present without JS where the project declares SSR/SSG)

Materiality bar

Report a row only when a competent user's outcome changes or a rule the project explicitly declares is violated — cite the rule it violates beside the evidence. Not findings: comment/punctuation typos, formatting-only drift, style preference with no cited rule, hypothetical robustness beyond the SPEC's named scenarios. An empty table with Decision: PASS is the expected result for a well-formed change — never pad the table.

Return exactly

REVIEW SEO — scope: <scope>

| # | Finding | Sev | Evidence | Suggested fix |
|---|---------|-----|----------|---------------|
| 1 | <what>  | critical|major|minor | <file:line> | <smallest action> |

Checklist: <n> evaluated, <n> pass, <n> findings, <n> n/a (<which + why>)
Summary: <1-2 sentences>
Decision: PASS | FAIL

FAIL if any critical or major finding is open; PASS otherwise. Minor findings never block — they route to the caller's triage step.

Done when

  • Every checklist item was evaluated with evidence (file:line or command output) or explicitly marked n/a with the reason.
  • The fixed-format block above is returned — nothing more, nothing less — and no code was changed.

Comments

Markdown supported