SEO Cannibalization Detector

seo-cannibalization-detector

Overview

This public intake copy packages plugins/antigravity-awesome-skills-claude/skills/seo-cannibalization-detector from https://github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills into the native Omni Skills editorial shape without hiding its origin.

Use it when the operator needs the upstream workflow, support files, and repository context to stay intact while the public validator and private enhancer continue their normal downstream flow.

This intake keeps the copied upstream files intact and uses the external_source block in metadata.json plus ORIGIN.md as the provenance anchor for review.

Imported source sections that did not map cleanly to the public headings are still preserved below or in the support files. Notable imported sections: Focus Areas, Cannibalization Types, Prevention Strategy, Approach, Output, Limitations.

When to Use This Skill

Use this section as the trigger filter. It should make the activation boundary explicit before the operator loads files, runs commands, or opens a pull request.

• Working on seo cannibalization detector tasks or workflows
• Needing guidance, best practices, or checklists for seo cannibalization detector
• The task is unrelated to seo cannibalization detector
• You need a different domain or tool outside this scope
• Use when provenance needs to stay visible in the answer, PR, or review packet.
• Use when copied upstream references, examples, or scripts materially improve the answer.

Operating Table

Workflow

This workflow is intentionally editorial and operational at the same time. It keeps the imported source useful to the operator while still satisfying the public intake standards that feed the downstream enhancer flow.

1. Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs.
2. Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes.
3. Provide actionable steps and verification.
4. If detailed examples are required, open resources/implementation-playbook.md.
5. Confirm the user goal, the scope of the imported workflow, and whether this skill is still the right router for the task.
6. Read the overview and provenance files before loading any copied upstream support files.
7. Load only the references, examples, prompts, or scripts that materially change the outcome for the current request.

Imported Workflow Notes

Imported: Instructions

• Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs.
• Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes.
• Provide actionable steps and verification.
• If detailed examples are required, open resources/implementation-playbook.md.

You are a keyword cannibalization specialist analyzing content overlap between provided pages.

Imported: Focus Areas

• Keyword overlap detection
• Topic similarity analysis
• Search intent comparison
• Title and meta conflicts
• Content duplication issues
• Differentiation opportunities
• Consolidation recommendations
• Topic clustering suggestions

Examples

Example 1: Ask for the upstream workflow directly

Use @seo-cannibalization-detector to handle <task>. Start from the copied upstream workflow, load only the files that change the outcome, and keep provenance visible in the answer.

Explanation: This is the safest starting point when the operator needs the imported workflow, but not the entire repository.

Example 2: Ask for a provenance-grounded review

Review @seo-cannibalization-detector against metadata.json and ORIGIN.md, then explain which copied upstream files you would load first and why.

Explanation: Use this before review or troubleshooting when you need a precise, auditable explanation of origin and file selection.

Example 3: Narrow the copied support files before execution

Use @seo-cannibalization-detector for <task>. Load only the copied references, examples, or scripts that change the outcome, and name the files explicitly before proceeding.

Explanation: This keeps the skill aligned with progressive disclosure instead of loading the whole copied package by default.

Example 4: Build a reviewer packet

Review @seo-cannibalization-detector using the copied upstream files plus provenance, then summarize any gaps before merge.

Explanation: This is useful when the PR is waiting for human review and you want a repeatable audit packet.

Best Practices

Treat the generated public skill as a reviewable packaging layer around the upstream repository. The goal is to keep provenance explicit and load only the copied source material that materially improves execution.

• Keep the imported skill grounded in the upstream repository; do not invent steps that the source material cannot support.
• Prefer the smallest useful set of support files so the workflow stays auditable and fast to review.
• Keep provenance, source commit, and imported file paths visible in notes and PR descriptions.
• Point directly at the copied upstream files that justify the workflow instead of relying on generic review boilerplate.
• Treat generated examples as scaffolding; adapt them to the concrete task before execution.
• Route to a stronger native skill when architecture, debugging, design, or security concerns become dominant.

Troubleshooting

Problem: The operator skipped the imported context and answered too generically

Symptoms: The result ignores the upstream workflow in plugins/antigravity-awesome-skills-claude/skills/seo-cannibalization-detector, fails to mention provenance, or does not use any copied source files at all. Solution: Re-open metadata.json, ORIGIN.md, and the most relevant copied upstream files. Check the external_source block first, then restate the provenance before continuing.

Problem: The imported workflow feels incomplete during review

Symptoms: Reviewers can see the generated SKILL.md, but they cannot quickly tell which references, examples, or scripts matter for the current task. Solution: Point at the exact copied references, examples, scripts, or assets that justify the path you took. If the gap is still real, record it in the PR instead of hiding it.

Problem: The task drifted into a different specialization

Symptoms: The imported skill starts in the right place, but the work turns into debugging, architecture, design, security, or release orchestration that a native skill handles better. Solution: Use the related skills section to hand off deliberately. Keep the imported provenance visible so the next skill inherits the right context instead of starting blind.

Related Skills

• @00-andruia-consultant - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
• @00-andruia-consultant-v2 - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
• @10-andruia-skill-smith - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
• @10-andruia-skill-smith-v2 - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.

Additional Resources

Use this support matrix and the linked files below as the operator packet for this imported skill. They should reflect real copied source material, not generic scaffolding.

Imported Reference Notes

Imported: Cannibalization Types

Title/Meta Overlap:

• Similar page titles
• Duplicate meta descriptions
• Same target keywords

Content Overlap:

• Similar topic coverage
• Duplicate sections
• Same search intent

Structural Issues:

• Identical header patterns
• Similar content depth
• Overlapping focus

Imported: Prevention Strategy

1. Clear keyword mapping - One primary keyword per page
2. Distinct search intent - Different user needs
3. Unique angles - Different perspectives
4. Differentiated metadata - Unique titles/descriptions
5. Strategic consolidation - Merge when appropriate

Imported: Approach

1. Analyze keywords in provided pages
2. Identify topic and keyword overlap
3. Compare search intent targets
4. Assess content similarity percentage
5. Find differentiation opportunities
6. Suggest consolidation if needed
7. Recommend unique angle for each

Imported: Output

Cannibalization Report:

Conflict: [Keyword]
Competing Pages:
- Page A: [URL] | Ranking: #X
- Page B: [URL] | Ranking: #Y

Resolution Strategy:
□ Consolidate into single authoritative page
□ Differentiate with unique angles
□ Implement canonical to primary
□ Adjust internal linking

Deliverables:

• Keyword overlap matrix
• Competing pages inventory
• Search intent analysis
• Resolution priority list
• Consolidation recommendations
• Internal link cleanup plan
• Canonical implementation guide

Resolution Tactics:

• Merge similar content
• 301 redirect weak pages
• Rewrite for different intent
• Update internal anchors
• Adjust meta targeting
• Create hub/spoke structure
• Implement topic clusters

Prevention Framework:

• Content calendar review
• Keyword assignment tracking
• Pre-publish cannibalization check
• Regular audit schedule
• Search Console monitoring

Quick Fixes:

• Update competing titles
• Differentiate meta descriptions
• Adjust H1 tags
• Vary internal anchor text
• Add canonical tags

Focus on clear differentiation. Each page should serve a unique purpose with distinct targeting.

Imported: Limitations

• Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above.
• Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment-specific validation, testing, or expert review.
• Stop and ask for clarification if required inputs, permissions, safety boundaries, or success criteria are missing.