yaojingang/yao-geo-skills

yao-geo-page-audit

Diagnose a website page or small page set for GEO readiness with authoritative public evidence, systematic page analysis, code/content/schema fixes, and four-format Chinese report delivery.

First seen May 23, 2026

Installation

$ npx skills add yaojingang/yao-geo-skills --skill yao-geo-page-audit

Similar popular skills

Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.

Also in this package

Other skills from yaojingang/yao-geo-skills · top by installs.

npx skills add yaojingang/yao-geo-skills

Browse all from yaojingang/yao-geo-skills

More details

Agent compatibility

Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.

Claude Code Not declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Not declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Repository health

Stars 736
License LICENSE
Default branch main
Open issues 0
Status Active

Skill metadata

Parsed from SKILL.md frontmatter.

More metadata
owner
Yao Team
family
geo-page-technical
maturity
beta
requires_web
1
default_outputs
Word, PDF, HTML, Markdown

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 4,879 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 215 B

History

  1. First seen on skills.sh
  2. First recorded snapshot · 20 installs

SKILL.md

<!-- Copyright © 2026 姚金刚. All rights reserved. Project: yao-geo-page-audit Created by: 姚金刚 Date: 2026-05-16 X: https://x.com/yaojingang -->

yao-geo-page-audit

Use this skill when the user wants a GEO Page Audit, website/page GEO diagnosis, page technical audit, AI extractability audit, schema/HTML module advice, or code/content repair list for a URL.

Job

Given a target URL or website, diagnose the homepage, a representative first-level page, and a representative second-level page when possible. Output development-ready and content-ready recommendations that improve how public pages can be discovered, parsed, cited, and summarized by search-driven AI systems. By default, analyze public page readiness and public evidence coverage only; do not estimate AI-platform recall, rankings, citation share, or internal platform behavior unless the user provides platform sampling data.

Workflow

  1. Read references/research-foundation.md, references/authority-reference-model.md, and references/report-module-taxonomy.md. Frame the audit as a five-stage chain: discovery, retrieval candidate, main-content extraction, evidence quality, generated citation.
  2. Identify page type and sample scope. If the input is a homepage, select homepage, one representative first-level page, and one representative second-level page. State the selection basis and unresolved input gaps.
  3. Build an evidence ledger. Prefer official pages, official docs, schema/source code, standards, and peer-reviewed or arXiv research before third-party commentary. Mark each finding as observed, official, standard, research, inferred, or input gap.
  4. Check crawlability and renderability: status code, robots, sitemap, canonical, meta robots, mobile-first parity, JavaScript dependency, and whether primary content appears in initial HTML.
  5. Check structural quality: H1-H3, main/article, summary, table of contents, FAQ, tables, lists, breadcrumbs, internal links, anchor text, accessibility headings, and schema.
  6. Check content evidence: conclusions first, full entity names, data, citations, cases, dates, author/source, freshness, objectivity, price, service boundaries, regional constraints, and source accountability.
  7. Check AI extractability and public-answer material coverage: key-value facts, atomic facts, comparison tables, steps, Q&A, context-independent summary, paragraph independence, entity graph, sameAs links, and chunk-level citation readiness. Convert domestic platform concerns into high-intent question material gaps, not platform recall claims.
  8. Produce code-layer fixes, content-layer fixes, page-module suggestions, schema/HTML snippets, priority, owner, acceptance test, risk, and estimated cost.
  9. Deliver Word, PDF, sticky-menu HTML, and Markdown from one Markdown content source. Use the kami editorial report style in references/report-formatting-spec.md and references/output-layout-policy.md.
  10. After DOCX generation, run scripts/polish_docx.py to apply Kami-style Word typography, margins, and table formatting.
  11. Run scripts/reviewreportlayout.py and references/quality-gates.md before claiming completion.

Boundaries

  • Without crawl/log access, only report front-end observable evidence. Do not infer log-level crawl frequency.
  • Without AI-platform sampling data, do not analyze platform recall, ranking, answer frequency, citation share, or platform-internal weighting. Replace that section with public material coverage and high-intent question readiness.
  • Distinguish user-visible content, crawler-readable content, and AI-extractable content.
  • Schema must match page body facts. Do not use schema to invent facts absent from the page.
  • Cite or name the evidence source for important claims. If the source is not available, label the recommendation as a hypothesis or input gap.
  • Domestic answer-material adaptation should consider search results, public webpages, news pages, encyclopedia pages, WeChat public articles, documentation, and help-center pages as possible public material. Treat actual platform answer performance as optional user-supplied evidence.

Outputs

  • Page GEO diagnosis report.
  • Code-layer repair checklist.
  • Content-structure remodeling advice.
  • Schema and HTML module suggestions.
  • Evidence ledger and report completeness self-check.
  • Default four-piece deliverable: Word, PDF, HTML package, Markdown.
  • quality-report.json with artifact existence, byte size, and layout checks.