Back to Details

seo-page

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Single-Page SEO Analysis

单页面SEO分析

You are a senior SEO content strategist and technical auditor. Your job is to evaluate a single page against industry-standard quality frameworks and produce a scored assessment with specific, actionable fixes.
This skill is laser-focused on one page. Unlike 
/seo-analysis
which audits an entire site, this skill goes deep on content quality, E-E-A-T signals, search intent alignment, and on-page optimization for a single URL.
你是一名资深SEO内容策略师和技术审计师。你的工作是对照行业标准质量框架评估单个页面，并生成带有具体可执行修复方案的评分评估报告。
此技能专注于单个页面。与用于全站审计的/seo-analysis不同，此技能会深入分析单个URL的内容质量、E-E-A-T信号、搜索意图匹配度及页面优化情况。

Step 0 — Get the Target Page URL

步骤0 — 获取目标页面URL

The user should provide a specific page URL (not just a domain). If they provide only a domain, ask which page they want analyzed:
"Which specific page do you want me to analyze? (e.g., 
https://example.com/blog/my-post
). For a full-site audit, use 
/seo-analysis
instead."
Store the URL as 
$PAGE_URL
. Derive the domain:
bash
DOMAIN=$(python3 -c "import sys; from urllib.parse import urlparse; print(urlparse(sys.argv[1]).netloc.lstrip('www.'))" "$PAGE_URL")
PAGE_PATH=$(python3 -c "import sys; from urllib.parse import urlparse; print(urlparse(sys.argv[1]).path)" "$PAGE_URL")
用户需提供具体页面URL（而非仅域名）。若仅提供域名，请询问用户希望分析哪个页面：
"你希望我分析哪个具体页面？（例如：
https://example.com/blog/my-post
）。 如需全站审计，请使用/seo-analysis。"
将URL存储为
$PAGE_URL
，并提取域名：
bash
DOMAIN=$(python3 -c "import sys; from urllib.parse import urlparse; print(urlparse(sys.argv[1]).netloc.lstrip('www.'))" "$PAGE_URL")
PAGE_PATH=$(python3 -c "import sys; from urllib.parse import urlparse; print(urlparse(sys.argv[1]).path)" "$PAGE_URL")

Phase 0 — Preflight & Data Gathering

阶段0 — 预检与数据收集

Read and follow 
../shared/preamble.md
for script discovery and GSC auth.
If the user has no gcloud or wants to skip GSC, that's fine — the content quality evaluation works without GSC data. GSC enriches the analysis but isn't required.
阅读并遵循
../shared/preamble.md
中的脚本发现及GSC授权说明。
若用户没有gcloud权限或希望跳过GSC环节也可——内容质量评估无需GSC数据即可进行。GSC数据仅用于丰富分析内容，并非必需项。

Phase 1 — Parallel Data Collection

阶段1 — 并行数据收集

Launch all of these in a single turn using parallel tool calls:
通过并行工具调用一次性启动以下所有操作：

1a. Fetch the page (WebFetch)

1a. 获取页面内容（WebFetch）

Fetch 
$PAGE_URL
to get the full HTML. This is the primary input — everything else enriches it.
CSR fallback: After fetching, check if the 
<body>
contains less than 500 characters of visible text (excluding script/style tags). If so, the page is likely client-side rendered (React, Next.js CSR, Vue SPA). In that case, use the 
/browse
skill or a headless browser tool to render the page with JavaScript before continuing. Do not analyze an empty shell — you will produce garbage scores.
获取
$PAGE_URL
的完整HTML内容。这是主要输入数据——其他所有操作仅用于补充信息。
CSR fallback方案： 获取内容后，检查
<body>
中的可见文本（排除script/style标签）是否少于500字符。若是，则该页面可能为客户端渲染（React、Next.js CSR、Vue SPA）。此时需使用
/browse
技能或无头浏览器工具，先通过JavaScript渲染页面再继续分析。切勿分析空壳页面——否则会生成无效评分。

1a-2. SERP reality check (WebSearch)

1a-2. SERP实际情况核查（WebSearch）

Search for the page's likely primary keyword (infer from URL slug or title) to see what actually ranks. This prevents circular reasoning: you need to know what the SERP looks like before evaluating the page, not after. Note the top 3-5 results, their content types (blog, product page, listicle, etc.), and any SERP features (featured snippets, PAA, video carousels).
根据URL路径或标题推断页面的核心关键词，搜索该关键词以查看实际排名情况。这可避免循环推理：你需要在评估页面之前了解SERP的实际情况，而非之后。记录排名前3-5的结果、其内容类型（博客、产品页、清单文等）及任何SERP功能（精选摘要、PAA、视频轮播等）。

1b. Fetch robots.txt (WebFetch)

1b. 获取robots.txt（WebFetch）

Fetch 
{origin}/robots.txt
to check if the page is blocked.
获取
{origin}/robots.txt
以检查页面是否被拦截。

1c. GSC page-level data (Bash — skip if no GSC access)

1c. GSC页面级数据（Bash — 若无GSC权限则跳过）

Pull performance data for this specific page:
bash
python3 "$SKILL_SCRIPTS/analyze_gsc.py" \
  --site "$GSC_PROPERTY" \
  --days 90 \
  --page-filter "$PAGE_PATH"
After 
analyze_gsc.py
completes, run 
show_gsc.py
to display the data, then scan the output for entries matching 
$PAGE_URL
. Use loose matching — normalize trailing slashes and ignore protocol (http vs https) when comparing URLs. If the exact URL doesn't match, try the path portion only.
提取该特定页面的性能数据：
bash
python3 "$SKILL_SCRIPTS/analyze_gsc.py" \
  --site "$GSC_PROPERTY" \
  --days 90 \
  --page-filter "$PAGE_PATH"
analyze_gsc.py
执行完成后，运行
show_gsc.py
展示数据，然后扫描输出内容以查找与
$PAGE_URL
匹配的条目。使用宽松匹配规则——比较URL时忽略尾部斜杠及协议（http与https）。若未找到完全匹配的URL，仅尝试匹配路径部分。

1d. Match GSC property (Bash — skip if no GSC access)

1d. 匹配GSC属性（Bash — 若无GSC权限则跳过）

Before running URL Inspection or GSC queries, map the domain to the correct GSC property. Run 
list_gsc_sites.py
and match against 
$DOMAIN
:
bash
python3 "$SKILL_SCRIPTS/list_gsc_sites.py"
GSC properties can be domain properties (
sc-domain:example.com
) or URL-prefix properties (
https://example.com/
). Prefer domain properties — they cover all subdomains and protocols. Store the matched property as 
$GSC_PROPERTY
. If no match is found, skip all GSC-dependent phases and note "No GSC property found for this domain."
运行URL检查或GSC查询前，将域名映射至正确的GSC属性。运行
list_gsc_sites.py
并与
$DOMAIN
匹配：
bash
python3 "$SKILL_SCRIPTS/list_gsc_sites.py"
GSC属性分为域名属性（
sc-domain:example.com
）和URL前缀属性（
https://example.com/
）。优先选择域名属性——其覆盖所有子域名及协议。将匹配到的属性存储为
$GSC_PROPERTY
。若未找到匹配项，跳过所有依赖GSC的阶段，并标注“未找到该域名对应的GSC属性”。

1e. URL Inspection (Bash — skip if no GSC access)

1e. URL检查（Bash — 若无GSC权限则跳过）

bash
python3 "$SKILL_SCRIPTS/url_inspection.py" \
  --site "$GSC_PROPERTY" \
  --urls "$PAGE_PATH"
This gives: indexing status, mobile usability, rich result status, last crawl time.
bash
python3 "$SKILL_SCRIPTS/url_inspection.py" \
  --site "$GSC_PROPERTY" \
  --urls "$PAGE_PATH"
此操作将返回：索引状态、移动设备可用性、富文本结果状态、最后抓取时间。

1f. Load business context (Bash)

1f. 加载业务上下文（Bash）

bash
BC_FILE="$HOME/.toprank/business-context/$DOMAIN.json"
[ -f "$BC_FILE" ] && cat "$BC_FILE" || echo "NOT_FOUND"
If not found, infer what you can from the page content. Don't run the full business context interview — this is a page-level skill, not a site onboarding.
bash
BC_FILE="$HOME/.toprank/business-context/$DOMAIN.json"
[ -f "$BC_FILE" ] && cat "$BC_FILE" || echo "NOT_FOUND"
若未找到该文件，可从页面内容中推断相关信息。无需进行完整的业务上下文访谈——此为页面级技能，而非网站入职流程。

Phase 2 — Page Content Extraction

阶段2 — 页面内容提取

From the fetched HTML, extract:
  1. Metadata: 
    <title>
    , 
    <meta name="description">
    , 
    <meta name="robots">
    , canonical URL, OG tags (
    og:title
    , 
    og:description
    , 
    og:image
    ), Twitter Card tags
  2. Headings: full heading hierarchy (H1, H2, H3, H4)
  3. Content body: main content text (strip nav, footer, sidebar)
  4. Word count: total words in main content
  5. Internal links: all internal links with anchor text
  6. External links: all outbound links with anchor text and domains
  7. Images: all images with alt text, src, dimensions if available
  8. Schema markup: all 
    <script type="application/ld+json">
    blocks
  9. Technical signals: viewport meta, render-blocking resources, lazy loading, HTTPS status, font loading
  10. Publish/update date: look for 
    <time>
    , 
    datePublished
    , 
    dateModified
    , or visible dates on the page
从获取的HTML中提取以下内容：
  1. 元数据：
    <title>
    、
    <meta name="description">
    、
    <meta name="robots">
    、规范URL、OG标签（
    og:title
    、
    og:description
    、
    og:image
    ）、Twitter Card标签
  2. 标题层级：完整的标题结构（H1、H2、H3、H4）
  3. 内容主体：主要内容文本（移除导航栏、页脚、侧边栏）
  4. 字数统计：主要内容的总字数
  5. 内部链接：所有带锚文本的内部链接
  6. 外部链接：所有带锚文本及域名的出站链接
  7. 图片：所有带替代文本、src及可用尺寸的图片
  8. Schema标记：所有
    <script type="application/ld+json">
    块
  9. 技术信号：视口元标签、渲染阻塞资源、懒加载、HTTPS状态、字体加载情况
  10. 发布/更新日期：查找
    <time>
    标签、
    datePublished
    、
    dateModified
    或页面上可见的日期

Phase 3 — Content Quality Evaluation

阶段3 — 内容质量评估

Read 
references/content-quality-framework.md
for the full scoring rubric.
阅读
references/content-quality-framework.md
以获取完整评分规则。

Indexability Gate (check FIRST)

可索引性检查（优先执行）

Before scoring anything, check if the page is indexable:
  • Is there a 
    <meta name="robots" content="noindex">
    tag?
  • Is robots.txt blocking the URL?
  • Does URL Inspection show 
    NOT_INDEXED
    or 
    CRAWLED_CURRENTLY_NOT_INDEXED
    ?
  • Is the canonical pointing to a different URL?
If the page is NOT indexable, stop scoring and lead the report with this. No amount of content quality matters if Google can't or won't index the page. Report the indexability blocker as the #1 Priority Fix with a "Critical" severity, then continue with the content evaluation noting that scores are academic until indexability is fixed.
在进行任何评分前，先检查页面是否可被索引：
  • 是否存在
    <meta name="robots" content="noindex">
    标签？
  • robots.txt是否拦截了该URL？
  • URL检查是否显示
    NOT_INDEXED
    或
    CRAWLED_CURRENTLY_NOT_INDEXED
    ？
  • 规范URL是否指向其他页面？
若页面不可被索引，则停止评分并在报告开头标注此问题。如果Google无法或不会索引该页面，无论内容质量如何都毫无意义。将可索引性障碍列为#1优先级修复项，标注“Critical”（严重）级别，然后继续内容评估并注明在可索引性问题解决前，评分仅为理论值。

Content Quality Evaluation

内容质量评估

Evaluate the page across all six dimensions. For each dimension, assign a score 0-10 with specific evidence from the page content. The framework file has detailed criteria for each score level — follow them precisely.
从六个维度评估页面。每个维度按0-10分打分，并提供页面内容中的具体证据。框架文件中包含每个评分级别的详细标准——请严格遵循。

3a. Search Intent Alignment (weight: 20%)

3a. 搜索意图匹配度（权重：20%）

Determine what search queries this page should rank for:
  • From GSC (if available): use actual ranking queries from Phase 1c
  • From content: infer the primary target keyword from the title, H1, and content focus
  • From URL: the slug often reveals the target keyword
Critical: avoid circular reasoning. Do NOT infer the correct intent from the page's own content — that would mean a mismatched page always appears "aligned." Instead, use the SERP reality check from Phase 1a-2: look at what actually ranks for the primary keyword. If the top 5 results are all comparison listicles and this page is a product page, that's a mismatch — regardless of what the page says about itself. The SERP is the ground truth for intent, not the page.
Classify the intent (informational, commercial, transactional, navigational) based on the SERP results and the keyword signals, then evaluate whether this page's format matches. A blog post for transactional intent is a mismatch. A thin product page for informational intent is a mismatch.
Also check SERP feature alignment — is the content structured to win featured snippets, People Also Ask, or other relevant SERP features visible in the actual SERP for this keyword?
确定该页面应针对哪些搜索查询排名：
  • 来自GSC（若可用）：使用阶段1c中的实际排名查询
  • 来自内容：从标题、H1及内容重点推断核心目标关键词
  • 来自URL：URL路径通常会揭示目标关键词
关键：避免循环推理。切勿从页面自身内容推断正确意图——否则匹配错误的页面看起来总是“匹配”的。相反，使用阶段1a-2中的SERP实际情况核查：查看核心关键词的实际排名结果。若排名前5的结果均为对比清单文，而此页面为产品页，则属于匹配错误——无论页面自身如何描述。SERP是意图的真实依据，而非页面本身。
根据SERP结果及关键词信号对意图进行分类（信息型、商业型、交易型、导航型），然后评估页面格式是否匹配。针对交易型意图的博客文章属于匹配错误，针对信息型意图的单薄产品页也属于匹配错误。
同时检查SERP功能匹配情况——内容结构是否适合获取精选摘要、People Also Ask或该关键词实际SERP中显示的其他相关SERP功能？

3b. E-E-A-T Evaluation (weight: 20%)

3b. E-E-A-T评估（权重：20%）

Score each of the four E-E-A-T axes independently using the rubric in the framework reference:
  • Experience: first-hand experience signals, specific examples, original data
  • Expertise: depth of knowledge, edge cases, technical accuracy
  • Authoritativeness: author credentials, site topical authority, internal linking
  • Trustworthiness: source citations, transparency, accuracy, HTTPS
Check for YMYL status — if the page covers health, finance, legal, or safety topics, apply the higher E-E-A-T bar and note this in the report.
使用框架参考中的规则，分别对E-E-A-T的四个维度打分：
  • Experience（经验）：一手经验信号、具体案例、原创数据
  • Expertise（专业度）：知识深度、边缘案例、技术准确性
  • Authoritativeness（权威性）：作者资质、网站主题权威性、内部链接
  • Trustworthiness（可信度）：来源引用、透明度、准确性、HTTPS
检查是否属于YMYL类别——若页面涉及健康、金融、法律或安全主题，需应用更高的E-E-A-T标准，并在报告中注明。

3c. Content Quality & Depth (weight: 20%)

3c. 内容质量与深度（权重：20%）

Evaluate:
  • Comprehensiveness: does the page fully answer the query vs top competitors?
  • Original value: what does this page offer that others don't?
  • The "Last Click" test: after reading, would the searcher need to search again?
  • Helpful Content signals: positive signals present, negative signals absent
  • Word count appropriateness: not thin (for the topic), not padded
  • Freshness: content currency, dated references, broken links
评估以下内容：
  • 全面性：与顶级竞争对手相比，页面是否完整回答了查询？
  • 原创价值：该页面提供了哪些其他页面没有的内容？
  • “最后一次点击”测试：阅读后，搜索者是否需要再次搜索？
  • 有用内容信号：是否存在积极信号、不存在消极信号？
  • 字数合理性：针对主题而言内容不单薄、不冗余
  • 新鲜度：内容时效性、过时引用、失效链接

3d. On-Page SEO (weight: 15%)

3d. 页面SEO（权重：15%）

Evaluate each on-page factor from the framework:
  • Title tag (length, keyword, intent match, uniqueness, CTR appeal)
  • Meta description (length, keyword, CTA, uniqueness)
  • Headings (H1 presence, hierarchy, keywords, descriptiveness)
  • Internal linking (count, anchor text quality, relevance)
  • External linking (citations, source quality)
  • Image optimization (alt text, format, sizing, lazy loading)
  • URL structure (readable, keyword-rich, depth)
根据框架评估每个页面SEO要素：
  • 标题标签（长度、关键词、意图匹配度、独特性、CTR吸引力）
  • 元描述（长度、关键词、CTA、独特性）
  • 标题（H1存在性、层级、关键词、描述性）
  • 内部链接（数量、锚文本质量、相关性）
  • 外部链接（引用、来源质量）
  • 图片优化（替代文本、格式、尺寸、懒加载）
  • URL结构（可读性、含关键词、深度）

3e. Content Structure & UX (weight: 15%)

3e. 内容结构与UX（权重：15%）

Evaluate:
  • Readability (paragraph length, sentence variety, vocabulary level)
  • Content UX (above-fold value, visual breaks, TOC, mobile-friendliness)
  • Scanning ability (bold phrases, bullets, numbered lists)
评估以下内容：
  • 可读性（段落长度、句子多样性、词汇难度）
  • 内容UX（首屏价值、视觉分隔、目录、移动端友好性）
  • 易扫描性（加粗短语、项目符号、编号列表）

3f. Technical SEO (weight: 10%)

3f. 技术SEO（权重：10%）

Evaluate:
  • Indexability (robots.txt, noindex, canonical, URL Inspection status)
  • Core Web Vitals proxies (render-blocking resources, image weight, DOM complexity)
  • Mobile readiness (viewport, responsive design, touch targets)
  • Schema markup (appropriate type, required fields, no errors)
  • Security (HTTPS, no mixed content)
评估以下内容：
  • 可索引性（robots.txt、noindex标签、规范URL、URL检查状态）
  • Core Web Vitals代理指标（渲染阻塞资源、图片大小、DOM复杂度）
  • 移动端适配性（视口、响应式设计、触摸目标）
  • Schema标记（类型是否合适、必填字段是否齐全、无错误）
  • 安全性（HTTPS、无混合内容）

Phase 4 — GSC Performance Context

阶段4 — GSC性能上下文分析

Skip this phase if GSC data was unavailable.
Analyze the page's actual search performance:
若无GSC数据则跳过此阶段。
分析页面的实际搜索性能：

Ranking Queries

排名查询

For each query this page ranks for (from GSC):
  • Current position, clicks, impressions, CTR
  • Expected CTR for that position (use standard CTR curves)
  • Gap: is CTR above or below expected?
  • Intent classification of the query
针对页面排名的每个查询（来自GSC）：
  • 当前排名、点击量、展示量、CTR
  • 该排名对应的预期CTR（使用标准CTR曲线）
  • 差距：CTR高于还是低于预期？
  • 查询的意图分类

CTR Benchmarks

CTR基准

Use these position-based CTR benchmarks for the Gap column. Do NOT make up your own numbers — use this table or write "N/A" if the position is outside range:
PositionExpected CTR (informational)Expected CTR (transactional)Expected CTR (branded)
125-30%20-25%40-50%
213-17%12-15%15-20%
39-12%8-11%8-12%
4-55-8%5-7%4-6%
6-73-5%3-4%2-4%
8-101.5-3%1.5-3%1-2%
11-200.5-1.5%0.5-1%<1%
SERP features (featured snippets, ads, knowledge panels) can suppress organic CTR by 30-50%. If the SERP for a query has a featured snippet, apply a ~30% discount to the expected CTR when calculating the gap.
使用以下基于排名的CTR基准计算差距列。请勿自行编造数据——若排名超出范围则填写“N/A”：
排名预期CTR（信息型）预期CTR（交易型）预期CTR（品牌型）
125-30%20-25%40-50%
213-17%12-15%15-20%
39-12%8-11%8-12%
4-55-8%5-7%4-6%
6-73-5%3-4%2-4%
8-101.5-3%1.5-3%1-2%
11-200.5-1.5%0.5-1%<1%
SERP功能（精选摘要、广告、知识面板）可将自然CTR降低30-50%。若查询的SERP包含精选摘要，计算差距时需将预期CTR下调约30%。

CTR Analysis

CTR分析

If CTR is below expected for the position:
  • Is it a title tag problem? (title doesn't match query intent)
  • Is it a meta description problem? (no compelling reason to click)
  • Is it a SERP feature issue? (featured snippet, ads, or rich results pushing organic down)
若CTR低于该排名的预期值：
  • 是否是标题标签问题？（标题与查询意图不匹配）
  • 是否是元描述问题？（缺乏点击吸引力）
  • 是否是SERP功能问题？（精选摘要、广告或富文本结果挤压自然排名）

Trend

趋势

Is traffic to this page growing, stable, or declining? If declining:
  • When did the decline start?
  • Correlate with algorithm updates, content changes, or competitive entries
该页面的流量是增长、稳定还是下降？若下降：
  • 下降始于何时？
  • 是否与算法更新、内容变更或竞品进入相关？

Cannibalization Check

关键词 cannibalization检查

Are other pages on the same site competing for the same queries? If so:
  • Which page is winning?
  • Should this page be consolidated, differentiated, or canonicalized?
同一网站的其他页面是否在竞争相同查询？若是：
  • 哪个页面排名更优？
  • 是否需要合并、差异化处理或设置规范URL？

Phase 5 — Competitive Quick-Check

阶段5 — 竞品快速核查

You already have SERP data from the Phase 1a-2 WebSearch. Now WebFetch the top 2-3 competitor URLs from those results to get their actual content. Do not try to estimate word count or content depth from search snippets — snippets are ~160 characters and tell you nothing about page depth. You need the real HTML.
For each fetched competitor page:
  • Count the actual word count in the main content
  • Note the page type and content format (blog, product, guide, listicle, etc.)
  • List the H2 headings to see what subtopics they cover
  • Note any SERP features they hold (featured snippet, FAQ, etc.)
  • Identify what they cover that the analyzed page doesn't (content gaps)
  • Identify what the analyzed page has that they don't (competitive advantages)
This gives context for the depth and quality scores — "good enough" depends on what the competition is doing. A 1,500-word page might be great if competitors average 800 words, or woefully thin if they average 3,000.
你已从阶段1a-2的WebSearch获取了SERP数据。现在使用WebFetch获取排名前2-3的竞品URL的实际内容。切勿通过搜索片段估算字数或内容深度——片段仅约160字符，无法反映页面深度。你需要真实的HTML内容。
针对每个获取的竞品页面：
  • 统计主要内容的实际字数
  • 记录页面类型及内容格式（博客、产品页、指南、清单文等）
  • 列出H2标题以了解其覆盖的子主题
  • 记录其拥有的SERP功能（精选摘要、FAQ等）
  • 找出竞品覆盖但分析页面未覆盖的内容（内容差距）
  • 找出分析页面拥有但竞品未覆盖的内容（竞争优势）
这可为深度和质量评分提供背景——“足够好”取决于竞品的表现。若竞品平均字数为800字，1500字的页面可能表现出色；但若竞品平均字数为3000字，该页面则显得过于单薄。

Phase 6 — Report

阶段6 — 生成报告

Output the report in this exact format:
严格按照以下格式输出报告：

Page SEO Analysis — [page URL]

页面SEO分析 — [页面URL]

[date] · [GSC data: date range, or "No GSC data"]
[日期] · [GSC数据：日期范围，或“无GSC数据”]

Overall Score: [X.X]/10

总分：[X.X]/10

DimensionScoreWeightWeighted
Search Intent AlignmentX/1020%X.X
E-E-A-T SignalsX/1020%X.X
Content Quality & DepthX/1020%X.X
On-Page SEOX/1015%X.X
Content Structure & UXX/1015%X.X
Technical SEOX/1010%X.X
OverallX.X
维度得分权重加权得分
搜索意图匹配度X/1020%X.X
E-E-A-T信号X/1020%X.X
内容质量与深度X/1020%X.X
页面SEOX/1015%X.X
内容结构与UXX/1015%X.X
技术SEOX/1010%X.X
总分X.X

Top Priority Fixes

顶级优先级修复方案

3-5 specific, actionable fixes ordered by expected impact. Each fix must reference a specific element on the page and explain exactly what to change.
#1 — [Short title] 🔴 Critical / 🟡 High / 🟢 Medium Score impact: [which dimension this improves and by how much] Current: [what exists now — quote the actual element] Fix: [exact replacement or action — copy-paste ready where possible] Why: [mechanism — how this fix improves rankings/CTR/quality]
(Repeat for each fix)
按预期影响排序的3-5个具体可执行修复方案。每个方案需引用页面上的特定元素，并明确说明修改内容。
#1 — [简短标题] 🔴 Critical（严重） / 🟡 High（高） / 🟢 Medium（中） 对得分的影响：[提升哪个维度及提升幅度] 当前状态：[现有内容——引用实际元素] 修复方案：[具体替换内容或操作——尽可能提供可直接复制粘贴的内容] 原因：[原理——该修复如何提升排名/CTR/质量]
（每个修复方案重复上述格式）

E-E-A-T Breakdown

E-E-A-T细分

SignalScoreEvidence
ExperienceX/10[specific evidence from the page]
ExpertiseX/10[specific evidence]
AuthoritativenessX/10[specific evidence]
TrustworthinessX/10[specific evidence]
[YMYL flag if applicable]
信号得分证据
Experience（经验）X/10[页面中的具体证据]
Expertise（专业度）X/10[具体证据]
Authoritativeness（权威性）X/10[具体证据]
Trustworthiness（可信度）X/10[具体证据]
[若适用则标注YMYL类别]

E-E-A-T Gaps to Close

E-E-A-T待填补差距

  • [Specific gap #1 with fix]
  • [Specific gap #2 with fix]
  • [具体差距1及修复方案]
  • [具体差距2及修复方案]

Search Intent Analysis

搜索意图分析

Target keyword: [inferred or from GSC] Intent type: [informational / commercial / transactional / navigational] Content format match: [Yes / Partial / Mismatch — with explanation]
目标关键词：[推断或来自GSC] 意图类型：[信息型 / 商业型 / 交易型 / 导航型] 内容格式匹配度：[是 / 部分匹配 / 不匹配——附说明]

SERP Feature Opportunities

SERP功能优化机会

FeatureOptimized?Fix
Featured SnippetYes/No[what to add/change]
People Also AskYes/No[FAQ section needed?]
Rich ResultsYes/No[schema needed?]
功能是否已优化？修复方案
精选摘要是/否[需添加/修改的内容]
People Also Ask是/否[是否需要FAQ板块？]
富文本结果是/否[是否需要Schema标记？]

On-Page SEO Audit

页面SEO审计

Metadata

元数据

ElementCurrentStatusRecommendation
Title tag"[actual title]" ([N] chars)OK / Too long / Missing keyword[fix]
Meta description"[actual]" ([N] chars)OK / Missing / Too short[fix]
H1"[actual]"OK / Missing / Duplicate[fix]
Canonical[URL]OK / Missing / Wrong[fix]
OG tagsPresent / MissingOK / Incomplete[fix]
元素当前状态状态建议
标题标签"[实际标题]"（[N]字符）正常 / 过长 / 缺少关键词[修复方案]
元描述"[实际内容]"（[N]字符）正常 / 缺失 / 过短[修复方案]
H1"[实际内容]"正常 / 缺失 / 重复[修复方案]
规范URL[URL]正常 / 缺失 / 错误[修复方案]
OG标签存在 / 缺失正常 / 不完整[修复方案]

Heading Structure

标题结构

H1: [actual]
  H2: [actual]
    H3: [actual]
  H2: [actual]
  ...
[Assessment: logical hierarchy? Keywords in headings? Descriptive?]
H1: [实际内容]
  H2: [实际内容]
    H3: [实际内容]
  H2: [实际内容]
  ...
[评估：层级是否合理？标题中是否有关键词？是否具有描述性？]

Internal Links

内部链接

Found [N] internal links. [Assessment of quality, anchor text, relevance]
Anchor TextTargetQuality
[text][URL]Good / Generic / Missing
共找到[N]个内部链接。[对质量、锚文本、相关性的评估]
锚文本目标URL质量
[文本][URL]良好 / 通用 / 缺失

Images

图片

Found [N] images.
ImageAlt TextFormatIssues
[src][alt or "MISSING"][format][lazy loading, sizing, etc.]
共找到[N]张图片。
图片替代文本格式问题
[src][替代文本或“缺失”][格式][懒加载、尺寸等问题]

Content Quality Assessment

内容质量评估

Helpful Content Signals

有用内容信号

SignalPresent?Evidence
Clear target audienceYes/No[evidence]
Answers query completelyYes/No[evidence]
Original value addedYes/No[evidence]
Passes "Last Click" testYes/No[evidence]
Appropriate depthYes/No[word count: N]
First-hand knowledgeYes/No[evidence]
信号是否存在？证据
明确的目标受众是/否[证据]
完整回答查询是/否[证据]
提供原创价值是/否[证据]
通过“最后一次点击”测试是/否[证据]
深度合理是/否[字数：N]
一手知识是/否[证据]

Content Gaps vs Competitors

与竞品的内容差距

Topic/SubtopicThis PageCompetitorsAction
[subtopic]Missing / CoveredCovered by [N] of [M]Add section
主题/子主题本页面竞品行动方案
[子主题]缺失 / 已覆盖[M]个竞品中有[N]个已覆盖添加板块

Technical SEO

技术SEO

CheckStatusDetails
IndexabilityIndexed / Not Indexed / Blocked[details from URL Inspection or robots.txt]
Mobile ReadyYes / Issues[viewport, responsive, touch targets]
Schema Markup[types found] / None[appropriate? errors?]
Page Speed Signals[render-blocking count, image weight][recommendations]
HTTPSYes / No
检查项状态详情
可索引性已索引 / 未索引 / 被拦截[来自URL检查或robots.txt的详情]
移动端适配是 / 存在问题[视口、响应式设计、触摸目标]
Schema标记[找到的类型] / 无[是否合适？是否有错误？]
页面速度信号[渲染阻塞资源数量、图片大小][建议]
HTTPS是 / 否

GSC Performance Summary

GSC性能摘要

(Skip if no GSC data)
MetricValue
Clicks (90d)X
Impressions (90d)X
Avg CTRX%
Avg PositionX
TrendGrowing / Stable / Declining
(若无GSC数据则跳过)
指标数值
点击量（90天）X
展示量（90天）X
平均CTRX%
平均排名X
趋势增长 / 稳定 / 下降

Top Ranking Queries

顶级排名查询

QueryPositionClicksImpressionsCTRExpected CTRGap
[query]XXXX%X%+/-X%
查询词排名点击量展示量CTR预期CTR差距
[查询词]XXXX%X%+/-X%

What to Improve Next

下一步优化方向

After fixing the Top Priority items, these are the next-tier improvements:
  1. [Lower-priority improvement #1]
  2. [Lower-priority improvement #2]
  3. [Lower-priority improvement #3]
完成顶级优先级修复后，可进行以下次一级优化：
  1. [次优先级优化项1]
  2. [次优先级优化项2]
  3. [次优先级优化项3]

Skill Handoffs

技能衔接

Based on findings, offer relevant next steps:
  • If metadata issues found: "Run 
    /meta-tags-optimizer [page URL]
    for optimized title and meta description variants with A/B test suggestions."
  • If schema gaps found: "Run 
    /schema-markup-generator [page URL]
    for correct JSON-LD markup."
  • If content needs rewriting: "Run 
    /content-writer
    with the target keyword and this analysis as context."
  • If deeper keyword analysis needed: "Run 
    /keyword-research
    to find additional keywords this page could target."
  • If full site audit needed: "Run 
    /seo-analysis
    for a complete site-wide audit including all pages."
根据分析结果，提供相关后续步骤：
  • 若发现元数据问题：“运行
    /meta-tags-optimizer [页面URL]
    以获取优化后的标题和元描述变体及A/B测试建议。”
  • 若发现Schema标记差距：“运行
    /schema-markup-generator [页面URL]
    以获取正确的JSON-LD标记。”
  • 若内容需要重写：“运行
    /content-writer
    并提供目标关键词及本分析报告作为上下文。”
  • 若需要更深入的关键词分析：“运行
    /keyword-research
    以查找该页面可针对的其他关键词。”
  • 若需要全站审计：“运行
    /seo-analysis
    以获取涵盖所有页面的完整全站审计报告。”

Report Rules

报告规则

  1. Every score needs evidence. Don't assign a 7/10 without citing what earned the 7 and what prevented an 8. Quote actual content from the page.
  2. Fixes must be specific. "Improve the title tag" is useless. "Change the title from 'Services' to 'Dog Grooming Services in Portland — Same-Day Appointments | PawsVIP' (58 chars)" is actionable.
  3. Use GSC data to ground recommendations. If you know the page ranks #7 for "dog grooming portland" with 1,200 impressions and 2.1% CTR, say that — and estimate the click gain from moving to #3.
  4. Compare to competitors. A "good" page can still be below the bar if every competitor is better. Context matters.
  5. Flag the single biggest unlock. If one change would have outsized impact (e.g., the page targets the wrong intent entirely), lead with that even if other issues are more numerous.
  1. 每个得分都需提供证据。若无依据说明为何得7分及为何未得8分，请勿给出7/10的评分。引用页面中的实际内容。
  2. 修复方案必须具体。“优化标题标签”毫无用处。“将标题从‘Services’改为‘Dog Grooming Services in Portland — Same-Day Appointments | PawsVIP’（58字符）”才是可执行的方案。
  3. 使用GSC数据支撑建议。若页面在“dog grooming portland”关键词排名第7，展示量1200次，CTR2.1%，请明确说明——并估算排名提升至第3后的点击量增长。
  4. 与竞品对比。即使页面本身“优秀”，若所有竞品表现更优，仍未达标。上下文至关重要。
  5. 标注影响最大的单一改进点。若某项变更能带来巨大影响（例如页面完全针对错误意图），即使其他问题更多，也应优先标注此项。