Review SEO (internal)
SkillWeb & browsingInternal SEO review pass of the agentic-workflow review pack — composed in-turn by review-change and product-audit; not a menu entry. Checks changed web pages/routes for indexability, metadata, and structured data — applies only to public web surfaces. Findings only; never edits code.
Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.
No other account needed.
Connect ahel once, and every AI you use reads what you have installed.
Then ask your AI: use the Review SEO (internal) skill
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by gtrabanco/agentic-workflow in skills/review-seo/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
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 diff or path/glob the caller passes; default the current change vs the default branch. 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
Report a row only when a competent user's outcome changes or a rule the project
explicitly declares is violated — cite the rule it violates beside the evidence.
Not findings: comment/punctuation typos, formatting-only drift, style preference
with no cited rule, hypothetical robustness beyond the SPEC's named scenarios.
An empty table with Decision: PASS is the expected result for a well-formed
change — never pad the table.
Return exactly
REVIEW SEO — scope: <scope>
| # | Finding | Sev | Evidence | Suggested fix |
|---|---------|-----|----------|---------------|
| 1 | <what> | critical|major|minor | <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 critical or major finding is open; PASS otherwise. Minor 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.
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 21
- Forks
- 3
- Last commit
- Sep 2026
Advanced
- Catalog kind
- skill
- Gateway key
review-seo- Source
- github.com/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow