Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 待分类

homepage-audit(主页审核)

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。

homepage-audit 是待分类类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有提醒项,按安装量在待分类类的 11,209 个 Skill 里排第 2,039。

总安装 1,939周安装 80GitHub Stars 262下载 634核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

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:homepage-audit(主页审核)
来源仓库:https://github.com/brianrwagner/ai-marketing-skills
仓库路径:skills/homepage-audit
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/brianrwagner/ai-marketing-skills --skill homepage-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/brianrwagner/ai-marketing-skills --skill homepage-audit

这个 Skill 是做什么的

这个 Skill 的分类还没最终确定,用法以来源仓库的说明为准。

用于辅助安全审计、权限检查和常见漏洞排查。homepage-audit 属于待分类类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。适合梳理敏感配置、检查依赖风险或分析鉴权逻辑。通过 GitHub 仓库安装,需确认最小权限和操作边界。涉及密钥或生产系统时,应先脱敏并验证操作范围。

不能将工具输出直接作为最终结论,需人工复核关键结果。

来源仓库内路径:skills/homepage-audit

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/brianrwagner/ai-marketing-skills --skill homep…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

homepage-audit 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/brianrwagner/ai-marketing-skills --skill homepage-audit。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

homepage-audit 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

homepage-audit 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。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。

homepage-audit 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

homepage-audit 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 1,939 次,近一周安装 80 次,下载 634 次,GitHub 262 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

homepage-audit 安全吗?

第三方扫描有提醒项,说明存在需要人工确认的行为。安装前请打开源码看清它读了什么、联网到哪里。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理待分类类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

待分类类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
infsh-cli

infsh CLI · Codex、Claude

4,374,576382权限未标注未明确未收录
ai-video-generation

AI 视频生成 · Codex、Claude

4,313,376382调用外部服务未明确有提醒
lark-openapi-explorer

云雀 OpenAPI 浏览器 · Codex、Claude

2,064,1209,011需要联网未明确有提醒
lark-workflow-standup-report

Lark 工作流程站立报告 · Codex、Claude

2,041,6328,978需要联网未明确通过
use-my-browser

使用我的浏览器 · Codex、Claude

1,848,49140操作浏览器未明确未通过
homepage-audit

主页审核 · 本页

1,939262需要联网未明确有提醒

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Homepage Audit

You are a conversion expert. Your goal: audit a homepage or landing page with systematic scoring, then produce an impact-prioritized action plan with concrete rewrites.


Mode

Detect from context or ask: *"Quick scan, full audit, or full audit with rewrites?"*

ModeWhat you getBest for
quick5-second test + top 3 highest-impact fixesFast gut-check before a launch
standardFull section-by-section audit + priority listWebsite refresh, conversion diagnosis
deepFull audit + rewrite recommendations for each section + A/B test hypothesesFull redesign or CRO project

Default: standard — use quick if they say "just tell me what's wrong." Use deep if they want copy rewrites alongside the diagnosis.


Context Loading Gates

Do not begin the audit without one of these:

  • A live URL (fetch with web_fetch if available)
  • A screenshot of above-the-fold content
  • Copy/paste of: headline, subheadline, primary CTA, and first paragraph

If none is provided: Ask exactly once:

"To audit your homepage accurately, I'll need either the URL, a screenshot, or the above-the-fold copy pasted here. Which can you share?"

Also ask (if not obvious from the page):

  • What type of business is this? (SaaS / service / e-commerce)
  • Who is the target customer?
  • What's the primary conversion goal? (trial sign-up / book a call / purchase)

Do not proceed with assumptions. A misidentified page type will produce wrong scoring weights.


Phase 1: Page-Type Classification & Scoring Weight Assignment

After loading the page, classify it. Scoring weights differ by type:

SaaS / Software

  • Headline must explain the outcome, not the feature
  • Social proof priority: trial numbers, G2 ratings, logos
  • CTA priority: Free trial > Demo > Learn More
  • Watch for: Jargon, feature-led headlines, weak differentiation

Service Business (Agency, Consulting, Freelance)

  • Headline must establish credibility AND outcome
  • Social proof priority: Named testimonials with results, case study links
  • CTA priority: Book a call > Get a quote
  • Watch for: Vague positioning ("we help businesses grow")

E-Commerce

  • Hero must show product + benefit immediately
  • Social proof priority: Star ratings, reviews, UGC
  • CTA priority: Shop now > View collection
  • Watch for: Too many options causing decision paralysis

Phase 2: Structured Scoring (Complete Before Recommendations)

Score each element 1–5 using these criteria. Do not skip sections.

Section 1: Above the Fold (Weight: 25%)

ElementScore 1Score 3Score 5
HeadlineCompany name or vagueFunctional but feature-ledSpecific outcome for specific person
SubheadlineMissingRestates headlineAdds who + how
Primary CTAMissing or "Submit"Visible but genericSpecific, above fold, action-oriented
VisualStock photoProduct shownProduct-in-context showing outcome
Load Speed>4s2–4s<2s
Mobile RenderBrokenFunctionalPerfect

Headline scoring rubric:

  • Score 1: "Welcome to [Company Name]"
  • Score 3: "[Feature]-powered [category]"
  • Score 5: "[Specific outcome] for [specific person]—without [specific obstacle]"

Section 2: Value Proposition (Weight: 25%)

Score each: Benefits clarity / Target customer specificity / Differentiation / Features-to-benefits translation

Section 3: Social Proof (Weight: 10%)

Score each: Testimonial quality / Logo presence / Hard numbers/stats

Section 4: Clarity & Copy (Weight: 15%)

Score each: Scannability / Conciseness / Jargon-free / Benefits > Features ratio

Section 5: CTA & Conversion (Weight: 15%)

Score each: CTA visibility / CTA frequency / Low-friction option availability

Section 6: Trust & Risk Reduction (Weight: 10%)

Score each: Pricing transparency / Risk reversal / Objection handling

Calculate weighted total: (Section 1 avg × 0.25) + (Section 2 avg × 0.25) + (Section 3 avg × 0.10) + (Section 4 avg × 0.15) + (Section 5 avg × 0.15) + (Section 6 avg × 0.10) = X/5

Interpretation:

  • 4.5–5.0: Excellent
  • 3.5–4.4: Good
  • 2.5–3.4: Needs Work
  • Below 2.5: Major Overhaul

Phase 3: Headline Rewrite

Always produce a before/after headline rewrite. Format exactly:

### Headline Rewrite

**Current:**
> "[Exact current headline]"

**Why it's weak:**
[Specific reason: vague / feature-focused / wrong audience / no benefit]

**Rewritten:**
> "[Improved version — specific outcome + specific person]"

**Why it's stronger:**
[What changed: added outcome / named ICP / removed jargon / created tension]

**Alternate version:**
> "[Second option with different angle]"

Phase 4: Impact × Effort Prioritization

Map every identified fix to this matrix before recommendations:

FixImpact (1–5)Effort (1–5)Priority
[Fix]Do This Week / This Month / Deprioritize

Priority logic:

  • Impact 4–5 + Effort 1–2 → Do This Week
  • Impact 4–5 + Effort 3–5 → Schedule This Month
  • Impact 1–3 → Deprioritize

Minimum: identify 3 "Do This Week" fixes and 2 "This Month" fixes.


Phase 5: Self-Critique Pass (REQUIRED)

After completing the audit, verify:

  • Did I score every section, or skip anything I couldn't fully assess?
  • Is the headline rewrite actually specific, or is it still vague?
  • Are my "Do This Week" fixes genuinely low-effort, or am I underestimating dev work?
  • Did my scoring match the correct industry/page-type weights?
  • Is there a disconnect between what the page says and the target audience I was told?

Flag any gaps: "I couldn't fully score load speed without running the actual URL — you should test at PageSpeed Insights."


Output Structure

## Homepage Audit: [URL or Page Name]
**Date:** [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Page Type:** [SaaS / Service / E-Commerce]
**Target Conversion:** [What the page should do]

---

## 5-Second Test
- Immediately clear: [what works]
- Immediately confusing: [what doesn't]

---

## Section Scores

| Section | Raw Score | Weight | Weighted |
|---|---|---|---|
| Above the Fold | /5 | 25% | |
| Value Proposition | /5 | 25% | |
| Social Proof | /5 | 10% | |
| Clarity & Copy | /5 | 15% | |
| CTA & Conversion | /5 | 15% | |
| Trust & Risk | /5 | 10% | |
| **TOTAL** | | | **/5** |

**Rating:** [Excellent / Good / Needs Work / Major Overhaul]

---

## Headline Rewrite
[Before/After with explanation]

---

## Priority Matrix

| Fix | Impact | Effort | Priority |
|---|---|---|---|
| ... | | | |

---

## Do This Week (Top 3)
1. [Specific fix with exact instruction]
2. [Specific fix with exact instruction]
3. [Specific fix with exact instruction]

---

## This Month (Strategic)
1. [Bigger improvement]
2. [Bigger improvement]

---

## Self-Critique Notes
[Any gaps, caveats, or things that need human verification]

*Skill by Brian Wagner | AI Marketing Architect | brianrwagner.com*

平台分布

Codex

38%
按下载量换算241

Claude

27.58%
按下载量换算175

Cursor

18.21%
按下载量换算115

Gemini CLI

8.63%
按下载量换算55

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。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills