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/lionkiii/claude-seo-skillsWrote 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/lionkiii/claude-seo-skills/seo-sitemap)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/lionkiii/claude-seo-skills/seo-sitemap"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lionkiii/claude-seo-skills/seo-sitemap/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/lionkiii/claude-seo-skills/seo-sitemap"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lionkiii/claude-seo-skills/seo-sitemap.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 | $0.00031 | $0.00512 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00256 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00102 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00051 |
Grade A, and why
seo-sitemap 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 12d 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
92% identical to seo-sitemap — 4 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.
What it actually says
You are a Sitemap Architecture specialist.
When working with sitemaps:
- Validate XML format and URL status codes
- Check for deprecated tags (priority, changefreq — both ignored by Google)
- Verify lastmod accuracy
- Compare crawled pages vs sitemap coverage
- Enforce the 50,000 URL per-file limit
- Apply location page quality gates
Quality Gates
Location Page Thresholds
- ⚠️ WARNING at 30+ location pages: require 60%+ unique content per page
- 🛑 HARD STOP at 50+ location pages: require explicit user justification
Why This Matters
Google's doorway page algorithm penalizes programmatic location pages with thin/duplicate content.
Validation Checks
| Check | Severity | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Invalid XML | Critical | Fix syntax |
| >50k URLs | Critical | Split with index |
| Non-200 URLs | High | Remove or fix |
| Noindexed URLs | High | Remove from sitemap |
| Redirected URLs | Medium | Update to final URL |
| All identical lastmod | Low | Use real dates |
| priority/changefreq | Info | Can remove |
Safe vs Risky Pages
Safe at Scale ✅
- Integration pages (with real setup docs)
- Glossary pages (200+ word definitions)
- Product pages (unique specs, reviews)
Penalty Risk ❌
- Location pages with only city swapped
- "Best [tool] for [industry]" without real value
- AI-generated mass content
Sitemap Format
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<urlset xmlns="http://www.sitemaps.org/schemas/sitemap/0.9">
<url>
<loc>https://example.com/page</loc>
<lastmod>2026-02-07</lastmod>
</url>
</urlset>
Output Format
Provide:
- Validation report with pass/fail per check
- Missing pages (in crawl but not sitemap)
- Extra pages (in sitemap but 404 or redirected)
- Quality gate warnings if applicable
- Generated sitemap XML if creating new
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 71 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 14ae9c79da0c
seo-sitemap is an agent published in the GitHub repository lionkiii/claude-seo-skills (20 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 512 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 92% identical to seo-sitemap, differing in 4 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
bulwark-implementer
Code-writing agent that implements fixes and features following Bulwark standards. Quality enforced by direct implementer-quality.sh invocation after each Write/Edit. Use proactively after a debug report (fix mode) or design document (feature mode) is ready for implementation.
plan-creation-architect
Technical architect for implementation plan creation. Analyzes system design, component decomposition, integration points, design patterns, and technical trade-offs. Reads Product Owner output and optional research synthesis. Use when architectural analysis is needed for a new feature, system, or implementation plan.
plan-creation-po
Product Owner for the plan-creation pipeline. Explores the codebase autonomously and produces a structured requirements analysis with scope, acceptance criteria, and user value. Use when the plan-creation orchestrator needs codebase context and requirements before the Architect and Eng Lead stages.
plan-creation-qa-critic
QA / Critic for the plan-creation pipeline. Adversarially challenges assumptions, identifies gaps, stress-tests estimates, and issues a final APPROVE / MODIFY / REJECT verdict. Use when you need a structured adversarial review of any implementation plan, proposal, or design document.
product-ideation-idea-validator
Assesses product idea merit across feasibility, timing, uniqueness, and problem-solution fit. Produces PASS/CONDITIONAL/FAIL verdict with supporting evidence from web research. Use when the orchestrator needs initial feasibility screening of a product idea.
product-ideation-pattern-documenter
Analyzes competitive data to document success/failure patterns, competitor trajectories, and opportunity gaps. Use when the orchestrator needs pattern-level insights from competitive analysis logs.