Review SEO (internal)
Composed by review-change / product-audit within their conversation — on any
agent, follow this file inline as the routed step. Findings only; never edits,
never refactors.
Scope
The caller's diff or path/glob — the shape is the finder contract's
(skills/review-implementation/references/FINDER_CONTRACT.md, this section's owner). State the scope at the top of the
returned table.
Checklist (evaluate EVERY item — none is optional; n/a must be stated)
- ✓ Read the project's SEO doc first (e.g.
docs/frontend/SEO.md) — n/a all items with the reason if the product has no public web surface - ✓ Every new/changed public page has a unique title and meta description within the project's declared lengths
- ✓ Canonical URL correct on new/changed routes (no accidental duplicates)
- ✓ Indexability intended = indexability actual (robots/noindex/sitemap state matches the page's purpose)
- ✓ One h1 per page; heading levels don't skip
- ✓ Structured data valid for the content type the project declares (cite the validator output when run)
- ✓ Links crawlable (real hrefs, not click handlers) on changed navigation
- ✓ Images on changed pages have descriptive filenames/alt where the SEO doc requires
- ✓ No render-blocking regression for primary content (content present without JS where the project declares SSR/SSG)
Materiality bar
The bar is owned by skills/review-implementation/references/FINDER_CONTRACT.md —
apply it as written: cite the rule it violates beside the evidence; never pad the table.
Return exactly
Sev and Impact are the two published closed sets (BLOCKER | CRITICAL | WARNING | SUGGESTION and blocking | docs-only | report-only); their meanings
are owned by review-implementation (CLASSIFY.md §Severity ladder) — assign a
token, never a prose grade.
REVIEW SEO — scope: <scope>
| # | Finding | Sev | Impact | Evidence | Suggested fix |
|---|---------|-----|--------|----------|---------------|
| 1 | <what> | BLOCKER|CRITICAL|WARNING|SUGGESTION | blocking|docs-only|report-only | <file:line> | <smallest action> |
Checklist: <n> evaluated, <n> pass, <n> findings, <n> n/a (<which + why>)
Summary: <1-2 sentences>
Decision: PASS | FAIL
FAIL if any BLOCKER, CRITICAL or WARNING finding is open; PASS otherwise.
SUGGESTION findings never block — they route to the caller's triage step.
Done when
- Every checklist item was evaluated with evidence (file:line or command output) or explicitly marked n/a with the reason.
- The fixed-format block above is returned — nothing more, nothing less — and no code was changed.