Technical SEO

Technical SEO Audit Skill

A reusable technical SEO audit workflow for crawling a site, validating indexability and turning technical evidence into a prioritized list of fixes.

Difficulty

intermediate

Works with

Screaming Frog, Sitebulb, Google Search Console, browser devtools

Inputs

  • Crawl export
  • XML sitemap
  • Search Console access
  • representative templates

Outputs

  • Issue inventory
  • evidence notes
  • prioritized remediation plan
  • validation checklist

What it does

This skill converts crawl data, rendered checks and search evidence into a technical SEO issue model. It keeps discovery, indexability, canonicalization and rendering separate so one symptom is not reported as several unrelated problems.

When to use it

Use it for a baseline audit, a migration review or a focused indexing diagnosis. It works best when you can inspect both crawl data and representative rendered pages.

Instructions

Begin by documenting scope and preferred URL rules. Validate a small sample manually before grouping crawl findings. For each issue, preserve the affected template, the evidence, the expected search effect and the verification method.

Do not prioritize only by URL count. A small issue on a critical template may matter more than a broad issue on low-value pages.

Quality checks

  • Every issue has reproducible evidence.
  • Recommendations describe the desired state, not only the symptom.
  • Canonical, robots and redirect findings use absolute example URLs.
  • Each remediation includes a post-release validation step.

Pair this skill with the Technical SEO Audit Playbook when you need a complete execution sequence.

Prompt and skill content

Objective: Audit the supplied website for technical SEO risks.

Inputs:
- Crawl export and crawl configuration
- XML sitemap URLs
- Search Console indexing evidence
- Representative rendered page samples

Method:
1. Confirm scope, host rules and preferred URL format.
2. Separate crawlability, indexability, canonicalization and rendering findings.
3. Group issues by template and likely root cause.
4. Attach reproducible evidence to every finding.
5. Prioritize by affected URLs, business importance and implementation risk.
6. Define a validation check for every recommended change.

Output a concise issue inventory followed by the prioritized remediation plan.
Do not infer impact from status codes alone. Flag missing evidence clearly.

Site search

Find research and resources

Type at least two characters to search.