Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索需要联网github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计提醒

audit审核

Agent Skill

用于辅助安全审计、权限检查、凭据风险、认证流程和常见漏洞排查。它适合让 Agent 梳理敏感配置、检查依赖风险、分析鉴权逻辑或生成安全复核清单。使用时不能把工具输出直接当最终结论,涉及密钥、令牌、用户数据或生产系统时,应先确认最小权限、脱敏方式和操作边界。

总安装

128,544

周安装

5,245

GitHub Stars

7

下载量

40,352
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:audit(审核)
来源仓库:https://github.com/calm-north/seojuice-skills
仓库路径:skills/audit
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/calm-north/seojuice-skills --skill audit
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/calm-north/seojuice-skills --skill audit

简介

全面的 SEO 审核,涵盖技术健康状况、页面优化、内容质量、反向链接和竞争定位。

  • 结构化五层框架:技术基础、页面优化、内容质量、链接概况、竞争地位
  • 包括可抓取性、可索引性、性能、渲染、标题/元优化、标题结构、内部链接和模式标记的详细清单
  • 提供页面级评分标准,其中包含加权部分(标题、元、标题、内容、关键字、链接、图像、技术)和按意图类型划分的内容长度基准
  • 纳入否决条件,限制 robots.txt 拦截、广泛的 noindex 标签、核心网络生命力不佳或缺少反向链接等关键问题的总分
  • 提供分层输出,包括健康评分、关键问题表、高优先级改进、机会、详细调查结果和 90 天行动计划

SKILL.md

SEO Audit

Run a comprehensive SEO audit covering technical foundations, on-page optimization, content quality, link profile, and competitive positioning.

Before You Start

Gather this context (ask if not provided):

  1. Domain. What site are we auditing?
  2. Goals. What are you trying to achieve? (More traffic, better rankings, fix a drop, pre-launch check)
  3. Known issues. Anything you already suspect is wrong?
  4. Access. Do you have Google Search Console and Google Analytics data? (Improves the audit significantly)
  5. Scope. Full audit or focused on a specific area? (If unsure, run the full audit)

Audit Framework

A complete SEO audit covers five layers. Work through them in order — problems in earlier layers undermine everything that follows.

Layer 1: Technical Foundation     ← Can Google crawl and index the site?
Layer 2: On-Page Optimization     ← Are pages optimized for target keywords?
Layer 3: Content Quality          ← Is the content worth ranking?
Layer 4: Link Profile             ← Does the site have authority?
Layer 5: Competitive Position     ← How does the site compare to competitors?

Layer 1: Technical Foundation

Check whether search engines can properly access, crawl, render, and index the site.

Crawlability

  • robots.txt — fetch and review. No critical paths blocked? Sitemap directive present?
  • XML sitemap — exists, valid XML, lists all important pages, excludes noindex/redirected pages?
  • Site architecture — important pages reachable within 3 clicks from homepage?
  • Orphan pages — any pages with zero internal links pointing to them?
  • Redirect chains — any paths with 2+ redirects in sequence?
  • HTTP status — all important pages return 200? No unexpected 301s, 404s, or soft 404s?

Indexability

  • noindex tags — any important pages accidentally noindexed?
  • Canonical tags — self-referencing on all pages? No conflicting canonicals?
  • Duplicate content — same content accessible at multiple URLs (www/non-www, HTTP/HTTPS, trailing slash)?
  • Search Console index coverage — how many pages submitted vs indexed? Any excluded pages that should be indexed?

Performance

  • Core Web Vitals — LCP < 2.5s, CLS < 0.1, INP < 200ms?
  • TTFB — < 800ms from major regions?
  • Mobile-friendly — passes Google's mobile usability tests?
  • HTTPS — enforced across the entire site? Valid certificate?

Rendering

  • JavaScript-dependent content — is critical content in the initial HTML or loaded via JS?
  • Content visibility — can search engines see the full page content?

Layer 2: On-Page Optimization

Check whether individual pages are properly optimized for their target keywords.

Title Tags

  • Every page has a unique <title>
  • Titles include the primary target keyword
  • Titles are under 60 characters (avoid truncation)
  • Titles are descriptive and click-worthy (not keyword-stuffed)

Meta Descriptions

  • Every important page has a unique meta description
  • Descriptions are 150-160 characters
  • Descriptions include a value proposition and call to action

Heading Structure

  • One H1 per page containing the primary keyword
  • Logical heading hierarchy (H1 → H2 → H3, no level skipping)
  • Headings describe section content accurately

URL Structure

  • URLs are clean, readable, and descriptive
  • URLs use hyphens (not underscores)
  • No excessive URL parameters or session IDs in indexed URLs
  • Consistent URL structure across the site

Internal Linking

  • Important pages have sufficient incoming internal links (3+)
  • Anchor text is descriptive and varied (not all "click here")
  • Hub-and-spoke structure exists for topic clusters
  • No broken internal links (404 targets)

Image Optimization

  • All images have descriptive alt attributes
  • Images use modern formats (WebP/AVIF) where supported
  • Images are appropriately sized (not serving 4000px images in 400px containers)
  • Decorative images use empty alt=""

Structured Data

  • Relevant schema markup present (Article, Product, FAQ, LocalBusiness, BreadcrumbList, etc.)
  • Schema validates without errors in Google's Rich Results Test
  • Schema matches visible page content (no hidden/misleading markup)

On-Page Scoring Rubric

For a detailed page-level audit, score each page across 8 sections:

SectionWeightWhat to Score
Title Tag15%Keyword presence, in first half, 50-60 chars, unique, compelling, intent match
Meta Description5%Keyword included, 150-160 chars, CTA present, unique
Header Structure10%Single H1 with keyword, logical hierarchy (no skipped levels), H2s cover subtopics
Content Quality25%Sufficient length, comprehensive, unique value, up-to-date, good formatting, E-E-A-T signals
Keyword Optimization15%Keyword in title/H1/first 100 words/URL, density 0.5-2.5%, semantic terms present
Internal/External Links10%Sufficient internal links, descriptive anchors, quality external links, no broken links
Image Optimization10%Alt text on all images, descriptive filenames, optimized sizes, modern formats
Page-Level Technical10%Clean URL, correct canonical, mobile-friendly, LCP ≤2.5s, HTTPS, schema present

Content Length Benchmarks (for full score on "sufficient length"):

Intent TypeTarget Word Count
Informational1,500+ words
Commercial investigation1,200+ words
Transactional500+ words
Local400+ words

Internal Link Count Guidelines:

Page LengthTarget Internal Links
<500 words2-4 links
500-1,000 words3-6 links
1,000-2,000 words5-10 links
2,000+ words8-15 links

Keyword density penalties: >3.0% = keyword stuffing (score 0); <0.5% = under-optimized.

Score grade scale:

ScoreGradeAssessment
90-100A+Exceptional — maintain
80-89AStrong — minor tweaks
70-79BGood — several areas need attention
60-69CAverage — significant improvements needed
50-59DBelow average — major issues
<50FPoor — comprehensive overhaul required

Layer 3: Content Quality

Evaluate whether the content deserves to rank.

E-E-A-T Assessment

  • Experience — Does the content demonstrate first-hand experience with the topic?
  • Expertise — Is the content written with subject-matter depth? Does it go beyond surface-level?
  • Authoritativeness — Does the site have a reputation in this topic area? Are authors credible?
  • Trustworthiness — Are claims sourced? Is the site transparent about who publishes it?

Content Coverage

  • Does each page have a clear target keyword and intent?
  • Is the content comprehensive enough to fully satisfy the search query?
  • Are there thin pages (< 300 words) that should be expanded or consolidated?
  • Is content up to date? Any pages with stale data, broken examples, or outdated advice?

Content Gaps

  • What topics do competitors cover that this site doesn't?
  • Are there keywords with search demand that no existing page targets?
  • Are there topic clusters that are incomplete (pillar page but missing spokes, or vice versa)?

Cannibalization

  • Are multiple pages targeting the same keyword?
  • If so, are they competing against each other in rankings?
  • Resolution: consolidate, differentiate, or canonical the weaker page to the stronger one.

Layer 4: Link Profile

Assess the site's backlink authority and quality.

Backlink Overview

  • Total referring domains
  • Dofollow vs nofollow ratio
  • Link acquisition trend (growing, stable, or declining?)
  • Average authority of linking domains

Link Quality

  • Any high-spam-score referring domains that could trigger penalties?
  • Are links contextual (in-content) or low-value (sidebar, footer, comment)?
  • Anchor text distribution — natural diversity or suspicious over-optimization?

Link Gaps

  • Which competitor pages earn the most backlinks? What content type?
  • Are there broken backlinks worth recovering? (404 pages that once had links)
  • Are there linkable assets on the site that aren't being promoted?

Layer 5: Competitive Position

Understand where the site stands relative to competitors.

Keyword Overlap

  • Which keywords do you share with competitors?
  • Where are you winning vs losing?
  • What keywords do competitors rank for that you don't?

Content Comparison

  • How does content depth and quality compare to top-ranking competitors?
  • What formats are competitors using that you aren't (video, tools, templates)?
  • What unique angles or data could differentiate your content?

Authority Comparison

  • How does your domain authority/rating compare?
  • Do competitors have significantly more referring domains?
  • Are there authority-building opportunities you're not pursuing?

Scoring

After completing all layers, assign a health score:

LayerWeightScore (1-10)Weighted
Technical Foundation25%[score][weighted]
On-Page Optimization20%[score][weighted]
Content Quality25%[score][weighted]
Link Profile15%[score][weighted]
Competitive Position15%[score][weighted]
Overall100%[total]

Scoring guide:

  • 8-10: Strong — maintain and optimize
  • 5-7: Needs work — clear improvement opportunities
  • 1-4: Critical — fundamental issues blocking performance

Veto Conditions

These conditions cap the overall score regardless of how well other layers perform. A single veto prevents a site from appearing healthy when it has a fatal flaw:

ConditionCapRationale
robots.txt blocks all of Googlebot or blocks /Overall capped at 1/10Nothing else matters if Google can't crawl
> 20% of important pages have noindex accidentallyOverall capped at 3/10Most of the site is invisible to search
All three Core Web Vitals are "Poor"Technical capped at 3/10Google deprioritizes sites with terrible UX
Zero external backlinks (entire domain)Link Profile capped at 2/10No external authority signal exists
Site serves HTTP without redirect to HTTPSTechnical capped at 4/10Google requires HTTPS for trust signals
Google manual action activeOverall capped at 2/10Penalty overrides all optimization

Check veto conditions before scoring layers. If any veto fires, flag it prominently in the executive summary and cap the relevant score.

Output Format

SEO Audit: [domain]

Overall Health Score: [score]/10

Executive Summary 3-5 sentences covering: the site's biggest strength, the most critical issue, and the highest-impact opportunity.

Layer Scores

LayerScoreTop Issue
Technical Foundation[x]/10[one-line summary]
On-Page Optimization[x]/10[one-line summary]
Content Quality[x]/10[one-line summary]
Link Profile[x]/10[one-line summary]
Competitive Position[x]/10[one-line summary]

Critical Issues (fix immediately)

IssueLayerAffected PagesImpactFix
.........high...

High-Priority Improvements (fix this month)

ImprovementLayerEffortExpected Impact
......low/medium/high...

Opportunities (plan for next quarter)

OpportunityLayerDescription
.........

Detailed Findings [Full findings organized by layer with specific evidence and recommendations]

90-Day Action Plan

Month 1: Fix the foundation

  • [Critical technical fixes]
  • [Quick on-page wins]

Month 2: Strengthen content

  • [Content gaps to fill]
  • [Pages to refresh]
  • [Internal linking improvements]

Month 3: Build authority

  • [Link building priorities]
  • [Competitive positioning moves]

Pro Tip: Try the free SEO Audit and Domain Authority Checker at seojuice.com for a quick automated baseline. For ongoing monitoring, SEOJuice MCP users can run /seojuice:seo-overview for live health scores with trends, /seojuice:site-health for technical topology, and /seojuice:competitor-analysis for competitive gaps.

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

35.45%
按下载量换算14,305

Claude

32.13%
按下载量换算12,965

Cursor

18.43%
按下载量换算7,437

Gemini CLI

10.68%
按下载量换算4,310

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills