Design rigorous A/B tests with hypotheses, variants, metrics, and sample size calculations.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Audits any landing or service page across 48 checks in 10 categories for LLM/AI discoverability, GEO readiness, content clarity, schema markup, internal linking, freshness signals, and technical crawlability. Produces an overall score out of 100, a per-category score out of 100, pass/warn/fail/ manual counts, and a prioritised fix list — all rendered as a standalone HTML report saved to disk. Use when a user provides a URL and asks to audit it, score it, check its GEO readiness, test its AI discoverability, run a landing page audit, or evaluate it for LLM citation potential. Also trigger on phrases like "audit this page", "score this URL", "check GEO for", "is this page AI-ready", "run a GEO audit", "LLM page check", "how would AI read this page", or "landing page score".
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Audits any landing or service page across 48 checks in 10 categories. Given a URL, fetch all required data, grade every check, calculate scores per category and overall, then render a standalone HTML report.
If the user provided a URL in the invocation arguments, use it directly. If not, ask:
"Please provide the URL of the page you'd like to audit."
Normalisation rules:
https://https://infrasity.com/claude-skills, not just infrasity.com)infrasity.com)Echo back the resolved URL before proceeding:
"Auditing
{URL}— fetching data now..."
Run ALL of the following fetches simultaneously. Do not wait for one to complete before starting the next.
Fetch {URL} with this prompt:
"Return the complete text content of the page. Include: all headings (H1, H2, H3, H4) with their exact levels and text, all paragraph text, all list items, the opening sentence and first 150 words of body text (excluding nav), any FAQ section content, testimonial or social proof text, pricing info, stats and numbers, target audience language, comparison language like 'unlike X' or 'instead of', negative scoping like 'not for X', measurable outcome claims like 'reduced X by Y%', all internal links with href and anchor text, all external links with href and anchor text, any visible date or 'last updated' text, any breadcrumb navigation, and any comparison tables."
Fetch {URL} with this prompt:
"Return: 1) All JSON-LD schema blocks verbatim including their @type values, 2) All image tags with exact src and alt attributes — list every image, 3) The meta title tag content, 4) The meta description content, 5) The canonical URL from the canonical link tag, 6) The robots meta tag content, 7) Any BreadcrumbList schema, 8) Any Service, ProfessionalService, SoftwareApplication or Product schema, 9) Any FAQPage schema, 10) Whether page content is visible in raw HTML without JavaScript execution."
Fetch {ROOT_DOMAIN}/robots.txt with this prompt:
"Return the complete robots.txt content. List every User-agent entry and its Allow/Disallow rules. Specifically call out rules for: GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, OAI-SearchBot, and any wildcard User-agent. Note the Sitemap directive URL if present."
Fetch {ROOT_DOMAIN}/sitemap.xml with this prompt:
"Check if {FULL_URL} or any variant appears in this sitemap. Return the exact URL match, its lastmod date, changefreq, and priority. Also return the total number of URLs in the sitemap."
If the first sitemap is an index file referencing sub-sitemaps, fetch the most relevant sub-sitemap and repeat the check.
Fetch {ROOT_DOMAIN}/llms.txt with this prompt:
"Return the full content of this llms.txt file. List every URL or path mentioned. Specifically check whether '{PAGE_PATH}' (the path portion of the target URL) or the full URL '{FULL_URL}' appears anywhere in the file."
RESPONSE_MS=$(curl -o /dev/null -s -w "%{time_starttransfer}" --max-time 15 "{URL}" | awk '{printf "%.0f", $1 * 1000}')
echo "TTFB: ${RESPONSE_MS}ms"
If curl is unavailable, mark check 10.3 as ⚠ Warning with note "Response time could not be measured."
Use the fetched data to evaluate every check below. Assign one of four verdicts:
| Verdict | Symbol | Score Weight | When to use |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pass | ✓ | 1.0 | Clearly present and meets the criteria |
| Warning | ⚠ | 0.5 | Partially present, improvable, or ambiguous |
| Fail | ✗ | 0.0 | Missing, broken, or clearly absent |
| Manual | ○ | Excluded | Requires human review to verify accurately |
Also write a short evidence note for each check (1 sentence max) — what you found or didn't find.
1.1 — Clear opening sentence describing the service
Look at the first sentence of body text (exclude navigation, hero buttons, GitHub badges).
1.2 — Service definition in first 100 words ('X is a [type] that…')
Count the first 100 words of actual body copy (strip nav links, CTA button text, icon labels).
1.3 — No unexplained jargon or acronyms
Scan for acronyms (all-caps sequences 2-5 chars) and technical terms used without definition.
1.4 — Use case statements present ('designed for X', 'ideal for Y teams')
Look for explicit target audience language.
1.5 — Negative scoping present ('not for X', 'we don't do Z')
Look for explicit exclusions.
2.1 — Proper H1 → H2 → H3 heading hierarchy
Check the heading order from the heading list returned in fetch 1a.
2.2 — At least one question-phrased heading
Scan all headings for text ending with ?.
2.3 — Short paragraphs (avg ≤15 words, no walls of text)
Estimate average paragraph length from the body text returned.
2.4 — Bullet points used for features or benefits
Count list items from fetch 1a.
2.5 — No generic filler opening paragraph
Check if the opening section is specific and value-dense.
3.1 — Brand name mentioned 5 or more times
Count brand name occurrences in body text.
3.2 — 3+ specific numbers or stats (not just years)
Look for concrete numbers — percentages, counts, dollar amounts, time estimates (not "2026" or "v3").
3.3 — Comparison language present ('unlike X', 'instead of', 'alternative to')
3.4 — Named service offerings consistently styled (bold or capitalised)
Check if product/service names are formatted consistently.
3.5 — Pricing shown on page or link to /pricing page
4.1 — Client testimonials or customer quotes
4.2 — Client logos or partner badges
4.3 — Specific measurable outcomes ('reduced X by Y% in N weeks')
These must be outcomes your service delivered for clients — not stats about your clients' industry.
4.4 — 3+ external links to credible sources
Count outbound links to authoritative domains (GitHub, research papers, government sites, established industry publications, Wikipedia).
5.1 — FAQ section with question-phrased H2/H3 headings
5.2 — JSON-LD Service or ProfessionalService schema
Check schema from fetch 1b.
Service, ProfessionalService, SoftwareApplication, or Product @type found in JSON-LDOrganization or WebPage schema present but no Service-type entity5.3 — JSON-LD FAQPage schema
FAQPage @type with Question and acceptedAnswer pairs in JSON-LD5.4 — Meta title accurately describes the service
From fetch 1b, check the <title> tag.
5.5 — Canonical URL correctly set
From fetch 1b, check the <link rel="canonical"> tag.
6.1 — What — service clearly explained
6.2 — Who — ideal customer identified
6.3 — How — delivery process or workflow described
6.4 — Why — differentiation vs. alternatives stated
6.5 — How much — pricing or budget range mentioned
7.1 — 10+ contextual internal links
Count internal links in body content from fetch 1a (exclude nav menu and footer).
7.2 — Related services or blog/resource content linked
7.3 — Breadcrumb navigation (with BreadcrumbList schema)
BreadcrumbList JSON-LD schema both present7.4 — Key service terms link to their own dedicated pages
Check if the main services/features mentioned in body text are hyperlinked.
7.5 — Comparison table present (tiers, packages, or vs. alternatives)
8.1 — Process or workflow steps defined (numbered or phased)
8.2 — Images with descriptive alt text
From fetch 1b, check every image's alt attribute.
8.3 — Page listed in llms.txt
From fetch 1e, check llms.txt content.
/claude-skills) or full URL appears in llms.txt9.1 — Content reviewed/updated within last 6 months
Check for any date signal: visible on-page date, sitemap lastmod, or content timestamps.
9.2 — 'Last updated' date visible on page
From fetch 1a, look for explicit "Last updated", "Updated:", "Published:", or a date string visible in the page content.
9.3 — Outdated stats, prices, or claims removed
9.4 — Changelog or version history present
10.1 — Page found in XML sitemap
From fetch 1d.
10.2 — Sitemap lastmod within last 6 months
From fetch 1d, check the <lastmod> value for this page's entry.
10.3 — Server response under 500ms
From Step 1f curl result.
10.4 — AI crawlers allowed in robots.txt
From fetch 1c.
Allow: /) or not mentioned in any Disallow rule (permissive by default)Disallowed10.5 — Page is indexable (no noindex)
From fetch 1b, check the robots meta tag.
<meta name="robots" content="index, follow"> or no restricting robots meta tagnoindex directive found in meta robots tag or X-Robots-Tag header10.6 — AI crawler path not restricted for this URL
From fetch 1c, check whether the page's specific path is blocked for AI crawlers.
Disallow rule covers the page path for any AI crawler user-agentDisallow rule on the page path applies to GPTBot, ClaudeBot, or PerplexityBot10.7 — Page content readable without JavaScript
From fetch 1b, check whether substantive content is present in raw server-rendered HTML.
Category Score = (Σ check_scores) / (total_scoreable_checks_in_category) × 100
Where:
check_score = 1.0 for Pass
check_score = 0.5 for Warning
check_score = 0.0 for Fail
Manual checks are excluded from both numerator and denominator
Round to the nearest integer.
Overall Score = (Σ all_check_scores across all categories) / (total_scoreable_checks) × 100
Total checks: 48. Manual checks excluded from denominator.
| Score | Colour label | Hex |
|---|---|---|
| 80–100 | Green | #22C55E |
| 60–79 | Amber | #F59E0B |
| 0–59 | Red | #EF4444 |
After grading, compile a ranked list of all Fail and Warning checks sorted by impact. Use this priority framework:
Impact tier assignment:
| Impact | Criteria |
|---|---|
| High | Check is a known LLM citation lever (llms.txt listing, Service schema, FAQPage schema, heading hierarchy, paragraph length, canonical URL, AI crawler access, JS readability) |
| Medium | Check affects content quality or trust signals visible to both humans and LLMs (measurable outcomes, comparison table, use case language, breadcrumbs, alt text) |
| Low | Check affects polish or freshness signals (changelog, last updated date, server speed, negative scoping) |
List the top 10 fixes in priority order. For each fix, include:
Read references/html-template.md for the complete HTML structure.
Populate the AUDIT_DATA JavaScript object in the template with all real data from this audit:
const AUDIT_DATA = {
url: "{FULL_URL}",
domain: "{BARE_DOMAIN}",
date: "{AUDIT_DATE}", // e.g. "June 16, 2026"
overallScore: {OVERALL_SCORE},
totalChecks: 48,
scoreable: {SCOREABLE_COUNT}, // 48 minus manual count
pass: {PASS_COUNT},
warn: {WARN_COUNT},
fail: {FAIL_COUNT},
manual: {MANUAL_COUNT},
categories: [
{
name: "Content Clarity & Directness",
score: {CAT1_SCORE},
pass: {CAT1_PASS},
warn: {CAT1_WARN},
fail: {CAT1_FAIL},
manual: 0,
checks: [
{ status: "pass|warn|fail|manual", label: "Clear opening sentence", note: "Evidence note — one sentence" },
// ... all 5 checks
]
},
// ... all 10 categories in order
],
topFixes: [
{ priority: 1, impact: "High", category: "Category Name", fix: "Fix title", detail: "One sentence detail" },
// ... up to 10 fixes
]
};
Do not leave any placeholder values unfilled. Every number must be a real value from this audit.
Write the completed HTML report to a file in the current working directory:
{domain}-landing-page-audit.html
For example: infrasity-com-landing-page-audit.html
After writing, tell the user:
"Audit complete. Report saved to
{filename}.html— open it in any browser. Overall score: {SCORE}/100 ({PASS} pass · {WARN} warn · {FAIL} fail · {MANUAL} manual) Top fix: {P1_FIX}"
Then offer to explain any category in detail or generate a prioritised action plan.
| Situation | Action |
|---|---|
| URL returns 404 or connection refused | Report the error clearly. Suggest the user verify the URL and try again. Do not proceed. |
| Page is entirely JS-rendered (raw HTML < 100 words) | Note that the page may be invisible to AI crawlers. Mark check 10.7 as Fail. Audit what can be assessed from the metadata and note limited coverage. |
| robots.txt returns 404 | Mark checks 10.4 and 10.6 as Warn with note "robots.txt not found — AI crawler access status unknown." |
| sitemap.xml returns 404 | Mark checks 10.1 and 10.2 as Fail with note "sitemap.xml not found." |
| llms.txt returns 404 | Mark check 8.3 as Fail with note "llms.txt not found at root domain." |
| JSON-LD not extractable via WebFetch | Note this limitation and mark schema checks as Warn rather than Fail unless confident the schema is absent. |
| curl unavailable for timing | Mark check 10.3 as Warning with note "Server response time could not be measured — curl unavailable." |
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Design rigorous A/B tests with hypotheses, variants, metrics, and sample size calculations.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment, or build a growth experimentation program. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "should I test this," "which version is better," "test two versions," "statistical significance," "how long should I run this test," "growth experiments," "experiment velocity," "experiment backlog," "ICE score," "experimentation program," or "experiment playbook." Use this whenever someone is comparing two approaches and wants to measure which performs better, or when they want to build a systematic experimentation practice. For tracking implementation, see analytics. For page-level conversion optimization, see cro.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Format CVs for academic positions with publications, grants, and teaching
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Conduct a comprehensive accessibility audit against WCAG guidelines with severity ratings and remediation steps.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Create accessibility testing plans covering assistive technologies and WCAG criteria.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
When the user wants to generate, iterate, or scale ad creative — headlines, descriptions, primary text, or full ad variations — for any paid advertising platform. Also use when the user mentions 'ad copy variations,' 'ad creative,' 'generate headlines,' 'RSA headlines,' 'bulk ad copy,' 'ad iterations,' 'creative testing,' 'ad performance optimization,' 'write me some ads,' 'Facebook ad copy,' 'Google ad headlines,' 'LinkedIn ad text,' or 'I need more ad variations.' Use this whenever someone needs to produce ad copy at scale or iterate on existing ads. For campaign strategy and targeting, see ads. For landing page copy, see copywriting.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。