Audit an article and suggest SEO improvements
An agent analyzes an existing article and its search context. Useful for SEO specialists, content teams, and agencies.
How this works
An agent analyzes an existing article and its search context. Useful for SEO specialists, content teams, and agencies. An SEO audit should improve an existing article's usefulness and alignment with a real search intent. It should not replace a strong piece with keyword repetition or promise rankings from changes that have not been tested.
Read the article as a user would, then compare its intent coverage and structure with available search evidence. Separate content defects from technical issues and from speculative opportunities. Produce a prioritized edit plan with examples rather than silently rewriting the live page.
Before you start
Article version
Capture the current text, title, headings, and publication date.
Search objective
Define the target query family and intended reader action.
Analytics access
Use available search data or clearly label a qualitative audit without proprietary metrics.
Prepare the inputs
- article
- Required
Text or page snapshot
Preserve heading hierarchy and source version.
- target_queries
- Required
Query list
Group by intent rather than treating every phrase as a separate topic.
- search_evidence
- Required
Results or analytics export
Record locale, date, and metric definitions.
- product_facts
- Required
Approved references
Keep suggested examples factually accurate.
- editorial_constraints
- Required
Brand and publication rules
Retain required disclosures and meaningful author voice.
Implementation, step by step
Read for intent
- Summarize the problem the article actually answers and the audience it assumes.
- Identify gaps between the promised title and the delivered explanation.
Checkpoint: An intent and promise assessment.
Inspect search context
- Review representative result pages and available query data for the chosen locale.
- Separate observed result patterns from unverifiable search-volume or ranking assumptions.
Checkpoint: A dated search-context note.
Map topic coverage
- Compare the article's sections with the questions a reader needs answered.
- Identify missing examples, definitions, or decision guidance without copying competitor outlines.
Checkpoint: A coverage map.
Prioritize edits
- Rank changes by the clarity problem they address and the effort required.
- Distinguish necessary factual corrections from optional experiments in title or structure.
Checkpoint: An actionable edit queue.
Draft targeted improvements
- Provide revised title, introduction, headings, or passages only where the audit identifies a specific issue.
- Keep keywords natural and preserve factual caveats and useful original material.
Checkpoint: A limited editorial revision.
Define the follow-up check
- Record what changed and which search or engagement observations will be compared later.
- Account for indexing delay and other simultaneous changes; do not attribute all movement to the edit.
Checkpoint: A measurement plan and review date.
Decisions along the way
Query intent differs from the article's purpose
Recommend a separate page or a scope decision rather than forcing unrelated content into this article.
Search-volume data is unavailable
Give qualitative priorities and mark volume unknown.
A competitor's claim is unsupported
Do not import it merely because the page ranks.
What you will produce
seo-edit-plan.csv
CSVGuides the editor through specific improvements.
Include: section · issue · evidence · recommended_change · priority
article-revision.md
MarkdownA reviewable revision, not a ranking guarantee.
Include: revised_sections · retained_sections · open_questions · measurement_plan
Check the result
- Verify proposed sections answer the actual query intent.
- Check factual and product claims against approved references.
- Read revised copy aloud for unnatural keyword repetition.
- Confirm measurement comparisons use consistent periods and definitions.
When something goes wrong
Extractor loses headings or tables
Use the original page or supplied document before assessing structure.
The rewrite removes important qualifications
Restore them and narrow the edit.
Analytics periods are incomparable
Delay quantitative conclusions and document the mismatch.
A worked example
SYNTHETIC EXAMPLE · NOT A REPORTED BUSINESS RESULT
Request
Audit an article targeting invoice approval workflow.
Inputs
Synthetic example. Synthetic article explains extraction but never explains who approves exceptions. Search evidence shows readers ask about approval responsibility.
Expected result
Synthetic expected result. Recommend an exception-ownership section with a concrete handoff example. Do not claim adding the phrase invoice approval ten times will improve ranking.
Run a small pilot
Start small
One existing article with a clear query family.
Record the baseline
Record current reader or search measures and editorial effort.
Agree success criteria
Agree content-quality and follow-up observation criteria before edits.
Stop or revise
Stop live changes if factual corrections or page purpose remain unresolved.
Keep the scope clear
- Audit findings do not authorize publishing changes.
- Search visibility is an observed outcome, not a guaranteed consequence of AI-written text.
Check before using
An editor checks the accuracy and value of the changes. Ranking improvements require separate measurement.
Business activities
- Create and publish content
FROM A RECIPE TO YOUR WORKFLOW
Bring the company context together.
This workflow needs reliable inputs before it needs a better prompt. Moat8 Vault brings working information into a readable archive for the AI tools you use.
For this recipe: Article text, URL, or document · Target keywords, if available
Start with one recurring task, agree which sources to use, and review the first result with your team.
Discuss this workflow