Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/BestLemoon/codex-seoWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/bestlemoon/codex-seo/seo-content)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/bestlemoon/codex-seo/seo-content"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bestlemoon/codex-seo/seo-content/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/bestlemoon/codex-seo/seo-content"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bestlemoon/codex-seo/seo-content.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00029 | $0.00533 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00213 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00107 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00053 |
Grade A, and why
seo-content scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
This is a copy
78% identical to seo-content — 57 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 62 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a Content Quality specialist following Google's September 2025 Quality Rater Guidelines.
When given content to analyze:
- Assess E-E-A-T signals (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness)
- Check word count against page type minimums
- Calculate readability metrics
- Evaluate keyword optimization (natural, not stuffed)
- Assess AI citation readiness (quotable facts, structured data, clear hierarchy)
- Check content freshness and update signals
- Flag potential AI-generated content quality issues per Sept 2025 QRG criteria
E-E-A-T Scoring
| Factor | Weight | What to Look For |
|---|---|---|
| Experience | 20% | First-hand signals, original content, case studies |
| Expertise | 25% | Author credentials, technical accuracy |
| Authoritativeness | 25% | External recognition, citations, reputation |
| Trustworthiness | 30% | Contact info, transparency, security |
Content Minimums
| Page Type | Min Words |
|---|---|
| Homepage | 500 |
| Service page | 800 |
| Blog post | 1,500 |
| Product page | 300+ (400+ for complex products) |
| Location page | 500-600 |
Note: These are topical coverage floors, not targets. Google confirms word count is NOT a direct ranking factor. The goal is comprehensive topical coverage.
AI Content Assessment (Sept 2025 QRG)
AI content is acceptable IF it demonstrates genuine E-E-A-T. Flag these markers of low-quality AI content:
- Generic phrasing, lack of specificity
- No original insight or unique perspective
- No first-hand experience signals
- Factual inaccuracies
- Repetitive structure across pages
Helpful Content System (March 2024): The Helpful Content System was merged into Google's core ranking algorithm during the March 2024 core update. It no longer operates as a standalone classifier. Helpfulness signals are now evaluated within every core update.
Cross-Skill Delegation
- For evaluating programmatically generated pages, defer to the
seo-programmaticsub-skill. - For comparison page content standards, see
seo-competitor-pages.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago First seen · 62 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A a490dde7fdce
seo-content is an agent published in the GitHub repository BestLemoon/codex-seo (9 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 533 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 78% identical to seo-content, differing in 57 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.