Page Experience Self-Assessment
Google retired the standalone "page experience ranking signal" framing.
Per https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/page-experience there
is no single page experience signal — Google's core ranking systems look
at a variety of signals that align with overall page experience. Of these,
Core Web Vitals are used by ranking systems; other aspects (HTTPS,
interstitials, mobile usability) don't directly boost rankings but make the
site more satisfying to use, which aligns with what ranking systems reward.
Evaluation is generally page-specific, with some site-wide assessments.
This skill runs Google's own self-assessment question list against a URL.
Google's Self-Assessment Questions
| # |
Question |
How this skill checks it |
| 1 |
Do your pages have good Core Web Vitals? |
Delegate to seo-core-web-vitals skill (field data at p75) |
| 2 |
Are your pages served in a secure fashion? |
HTTPS, redirect, certificate, mixed content |
| 3 |
Does your content display well on mobile devices? |
Viewport meta, responsive markup, font size, tap targets |
| 4 |
Does your content avoid excessive ads that distract from or interfere with the main content? |
Ad density heuristics on HTML (manual confirmation advised) |
| 5 |
Do your pages avoid using intrusive interstitials? |
Interstitial heuristics on initial HTML |
| 6 |
Can visitors easily distinguish the main content from other content? |
Above-fold content prominence, labeled ads |
Inputs
| Input |
Required |
Notes |
| URL |
Yes |
Single page; page experience is evaluated per page |
| Mobile or desktop focus |
No |
Default mobile — interstitial rules target mobile entry from search |
Execution
Fetch the page and check HTTPS:
curl -sI -L -w 'final_url=%{url_effective} http=%{http_code}\n' http://<host><path>
curl -s -o /dev/null -w '%{http_code}' https://<url>
http:// must 301-redirect to https:// (single hop ideal).
- Certificate valid (
curl -v shows no TLS errors).
- Scan HTML for mixed content:
http:// URLs in src=, href of stylesheets, srcset.
Check mobile usability on the fetched HTML:
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width..."> present.
- No fixed-width layouts (
width=1024 style viewports, large fixed px containers).
- Base font size ≥ 12px legible (16px recommended); tap targets ~48x48px.
- For deeper checks, cross-reference the
seo-technical skill (category 5).
Run interstitial heuristics on the initial HTML (the case Google
penalizes is a pop-up covering the main content when a user enters from
mobile search):
- Fixed/absolute full-viewport overlays in initial HTML: elements with
position:fixed or position:absolute combined with top:0 +
width:100%/100vw + height:100%/100vh, high z-index.
- Modal markers present at load:
class/id containing modal,
popup, overlay, interstitial, lightbox outside obvious consent
managers; <dialog open>.
- Body scroll-lock at load:
overflow:hidden on html/body in initial CSS.
- Redirects to a separate consent/input page (Google calls this out
explicitly as a mistake — it can remove all but that page from results).
- Flag findings as suspected — heuristics on static HTML can't see
JS-triggered timing; recommend a real mobile-device check.
Classify any interstitial found per
https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/avoid-intrusive-interstitials:
| Type |
Verdict |
| Full-page promo/app-install interstitial covering main content on entry |
❌ Intrusive |
| Dialog obscuring part of the content for promotion |
⚠️ Risky — prefer a banner |
| Legally mandated (cookie consent, age gate) |
✅ Exempt — but overlay content, don't redirect; for adult age gates, consider serving verified Googlebot without the gate |
| Login wall for genuinely gated content |
✅ Exempt |
| Small, easily dismissible banner (e.g., Smart App Banner, newsletter strip) |
✅ Fine — Google's recommended pattern |
Assess content prominence and ads:
- Is meaningful main content present in the initial HTML above the fold,
or is the first viewport dominated by ads/promos/navigation?
- Are ad containers distinguishable/labeled (e.g., "Advertisement",
aria-label, distinct containers)?
- Count ad-network script includes (adsbygoogle, GPT, taboola, outbrain,
mgid) as an ad-pressure signal. These are heuristics — note that final
judgment needs visual review.
Delegate CWV measurement to the seo-core-web-vitals skill and import
its PASS/FAIL verdict for question 1. Do not duplicate the measurement here.
Optional speed-up note: if the site is a publisher with heavy
search-entry traffic, mention Signed Exchanges (SXG) as a way to let
Google prefetch content and improve effective LCP from search
(https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/signed-exchange).
Quick Reference — Pass Criteria
| Check |
Pass threshold |
| HTTPS |
http→https 301 in ≤1 hop, valid cert, zero mixed-content URLs |
| Viewport |
width=device-width viewport meta in initial HTML |
| Font size |
≥60% of text ≥12px (16px base recommended) |
| Tap targets |
~48x48px with ~8px spacing |
| Interstitials |
No non-exempt full-page overlay in initial HTML |
| Ad pressure |
Main content begins above the fold; ads labeled |
Useful companion tools (from Google's resources list): Search Console's
HTTPS report and Core Web Vitals report, and Chrome Lighthouse
(https://developer.chrome.com/docs/lighthouse/overview) for mobile-usability
and page-experience improvement hints.
Output
# Page Experience Self-Assessment: <url>
## Google's Six Questions
| # | Question | Verdict | Evidence |
|---|----------|---------|----------|
| 1 | Good Core Web Vitals? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | from seo-core-web-vitals (p75 field data) |
| 2 | Served securely (HTTPS)? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | https enforced, cert valid, no mixed content |
| 3 | Displays well on mobile? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | viewport meta, font size, tap targets |
| 4 | Avoids excessive ads? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | N ad scripts, above-fold ad pressure |
| 5 | Avoids intrusive interstitials? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | overlays found / exempt types |
| 6 | Main content distinguishable? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | above-fold content vs ads/nav |
Overall: X/6 yes — "Answering yes to these questions means you're probably
on track in providing a good page experience."
## Findings Detail
### HTTPS (redirect chain, certificate, mixed content list)
### Mobile usability (specific failures with code locations)
### Interstitials (each suspected overlay: selector, type, verdict per the
classification table, recommended replacement — banner pattern)
### Ads & content prominence (observations + manual-review note)
## Recommendations (prioritized)
1. ...
## Context
- No single "page experience signal" exists; CWV is used by ranking systems,
other aspects improve user satisfaction rather than rankings directly.
- Evaluation is page-specific (with some site-wide assessments) — re-run on
templates that differ (home, article, product).
- Source: https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/page-experience
1---2name: seo-page-experience3description: Holistic page-experience self-assessment mirroring Google's own question list: Core Web Vitals, HTTPS, intrusive interstitials, mobile usability, content prominence, and ad distinguishability. Use when user says "page experience", "UX signals", "interstitials", "mobile friendly", or "HTTPS check".4---56# Page Experience Self-Assessment7<!-- Updated: 2026-06-10 -->89Google retired the standalone "page experience ranking signal" framing.10Per https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/page-experience there11is **no single page experience signal** — Google's core ranking systems look12at a variety of signals that align with overall page experience. Of these,13**Core Web Vitals are used by ranking systems**; other aspects (HTTPS,14interstitials, mobile usability) don't directly boost rankings but make the15site more satisfying to use, which aligns with what ranking systems reward.16Evaluation is generally **page-specific**, with some site-wide assessments.1718This skill runs Google's own self-assessment question list against a URL.1920## Google's Self-Assessment Questions2122| # | Question | How this skill checks it |23|---|----------|--------------------------|24| 1 | Do your pages have good Core Web Vitals? | Delegate to `seo-core-web-vitals` skill (field data at p75) |25| 2 | Are your pages served in a secure fashion? | HTTPS, redirect, certificate, mixed content |26| 3 | Does your content display well on mobile devices? | Viewport meta, responsive markup, font size, tap targets |27| 4 | Does your content avoid excessive ads that distract from or interfere with the main content? | Ad density heuristics on HTML (manual confirmation advised) |28| 5 | Do your pages avoid using intrusive interstitials? | Interstitial heuristics on initial HTML |29| 6 | Can visitors easily distinguish the main content from other content? | Above-fold content prominence, labeled ads |3031## Inputs3233| Input | Required | Notes |34|-------|----------|-------|35| URL | Yes | Single page; page experience is evaluated per page |36| Mobile or desktop focus | No | Default mobile — interstitial rules target mobile entry from search |3738## Execution39401. **Fetch the page and check HTTPS:**41 ```bash42 curl -sI -L -w 'final_url=%{url_effective} http=%{http_code}\n' http://<host><path>43 curl -s -o /dev/null -w '%{http_code}' https://<url>44 ```45 - `http://` must 301-redirect to `https://` (single hop ideal).46 - Certificate valid (`curl -v` shows no TLS errors).47 - Scan HTML for mixed content: `http://` URLs in `src=`, `href` of stylesheets, `srcset`.48492. **Check mobile usability on the fetched HTML:**50 - `<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width...">` present.51 - No fixed-width layouts (`width=1024` style viewports, large fixed px containers).52 - Base font size ≥ 12px legible (16px recommended); tap targets ~48x48px.53 - For deeper checks, cross-reference the `seo-technical` skill (category 5).54553. **Run interstitial heuristics on the initial HTML** (the case Google56 penalizes is a pop-up covering the main content when a user enters from57 mobile search):58 - Fixed/absolute full-viewport overlays in initial HTML: elements with59 `position:fixed` or `position:absolute` combined with `top:0` +60 `width:100%`/`100vw` + `height:100%`/`100vh`, high `z-index`.61 - Modal markers present at load: `class`/`id` containing `modal`,62 `popup`, `overlay`, `interstitial`, `lightbox` outside obvious consent63 managers; `<dialog open>`.64 - Body scroll-lock at load: `overflow:hidden` on `html`/`body` in initial CSS.65 - Redirects to a separate consent/input page (Google calls this out66 explicitly as a mistake — it can remove all but that page from results).67 - Flag findings as **suspected** — heuristics on static HTML can't see68 JS-triggered timing; recommend a real mobile-device check.69704. **Classify any interstitial found** per71 https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/avoid-intrusive-interstitials:7273 | Type | Verdict |74 |------|---------|75 | Full-page promo/app-install interstitial covering main content on entry | ❌ Intrusive |76 | Dialog obscuring part of the content for promotion | ⚠️ Risky — prefer a banner |77 | Legally mandated (cookie consent, age gate) | ✅ Exempt — but overlay content, don't redirect; for adult age gates, consider serving verified Googlebot without the gate |78 | Login wall for genuinely gated content | ✅ Exempt |79 | Small, easily dismissible banner (e.g., Smart App Banner, newsletter strip) | ✅ Fine — Google's recommended pattern |80815. **Assess content prominence and ads:**82 - Is meaningful main content present in the initial HTML above the fold,83 or is the first viewport dominated by ads/promos/navigation?84 - Are ad containers distinguishable/labeled (e.g., "Advertisement",85 `aria-label`, distinct containers)?86 - Count ad-network script includes (adsbygoogle, GPT, taboola, outbrain,87 mgid) as an ad-pressure signal. These are heuristics — note that final88 judgment needs visual review.89906. **Delegate CWV measurement** to the `seo-core-web-vitals` skill and import91 its PASS/FAIL verdict for question 1. Do not duplicate the measurement here.92937. **Optional speed-up note:** if the site is a publisher with heavy94 search-entry traffic, mention Signed Exchanges (SXG) as a way to let95 Google prefetch content and improve effective LCP from search96 (https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/signed-exchange).9798## Quick Reference — Pass Criteria99100| Check | Pass threshold |101|-------|----------------|102| HTTPS | http→https 301 in ≤1 hop, valid cert, zero mixed-content URLs |103| Viewport | `width=device-width` viewport meta in initial HTML |104| Font size | ≥60% of text ≥12px (16px base recommended) |105| Tap targets | ~48x48px with ~8px spacing |106| Interstitials | No non-exempt full-page overlay in initial HTML |107| Ad pressure | Main content begins above the fold; ads labeled |108109Useful companion tools (from Google's resources list): Search Console's110HTTPS report and Core Web Vitals report, and Chrome Lighthouse111(https://developer.chrome.com/docs/lighthouse/overview) for mobile-usability112and page-experience improvement hints.113114## Output115116```117# Page Experience Self-Assessment: <url>118119## Google's Six Questions120| # | Question | Verdict | Evidence |121|---|----------|---------|----------|122| 1 | Good Core Web Vitals? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | from seo-core-web-vitals (p75 field data) |123| 2 | Served securely (HTTPS)? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | https enforced, cert valid, no mixed content |124| 3 | Displays well on mobile? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | viewport meta, font size, tap targets |125| 4 | Avoids excessive ads? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | N ad scripts, above-fold ad pressure |126| 5 | Avoids intrusive interstitials? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | overlays found / exempt types |127| 6 | Main content distinguishable? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | above-fold content vs ads/nav |128129Overall: X/6 yes — "Answering yes to these questions means you're probably130on track in providing a good page experience."131132## Findings Detail133### HTTPS (redirect chain, certificate, mixed content list)134### Mobile usability (specific failures with code locations)135### Interstitials (each suspected overlay: selector, type, verdict per the136 classification table, recommended replacement — banner pattern)137### Ads & content prominence (observations + manual-review note)138139## Recommendations (prioritized)1401. ...141142## Context143- No single "page experience signal" exists; CWV is used by ranking systems,144 other aspects improve user satisfaction rather than rankings directly.145- Evaluation is page-specific (with some site-wide assessments) — re-run on146 templates that differ (home, article, product).147- Source: https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/page-experience148```