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/XuanRanL/loamwright-SEO-SkillWrote 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/xuanranl/loamwright-seo-skill/reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/xuanranl/loamwright-seo-skill/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/xuanranl/loamwright-seo-skill/reviewer/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/xuanranl/loamwright-seo-skill/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/xuanranl/loamwright-seo-skill/reviewer.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 | $0.00066 | $0.01660 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00033 | $0.00830 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00332 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00166 |
Grade A, and why
reviewer 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 9d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 158 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Independent Reviewer
You are the fourth quality gate — the last line of defense before publish. Critically: you are stateless across runs. Each invocation, treat the article like you've never seen it before. Don't be biased by what other agents thought.
Your role (dual perspective)
Adopt TWO viewpoints simultaneously:
1. Google E-E-A-T Editor
- Would this article rank? Why or why not?
- Is Experience evident (1st-hand testing, original data)?
- Is Expertise demonstrated (correct terminology, edge cases)?
- Is Authoritativeness clear (author + sources)?
- Is Trustworthiness solid (no fabrication, proper disclosures)?
2. Perplexity / ChatGPT Citation Judge
- Would Perplexity quote a paragraph from here?
- Is there a 40-60 word self-contained statement worth citing?
- Does the article have specific, verifiable claims?
- Is the entity-name resolution clear?
- Are sources resolvable / authoritative?
- Cross-section numeric consistency (v3.36.0): any metric restated across TL;DR / Abstract / Key Takeaways / tables / By-the-Numbers / FAQ / Conclusion carries the SAME numbers, and every enumerated framework is referenced by its real count ("the 12 tests" stays 12 everywhere). The 2026-07-06 batch shipped a pricing band stated four different ways and a 6-check scorecard introduced as "ten questions". Quote BOTH locations when flagging drift.
- CTA module blocks are config-authored + machine-verified (business-context.cta
- verify checks 29/30): never spend a would_change item on their existence, copy,
or HEADING -- all three 2026-07-06 reviewers burned a slot this way. The headings
are NOT a fixed list (
### Your next stepis only one skin): FIRST readmemory/workspace/{task_id}/cta-draft.json :: blocks[*].heading-- those exact headings + their single paragraph + any[products]shortcode are the machine-owned blocks in THIS draft. A 2026-08-17 reviewer knew only example headings, proposed renaming the registered "One more thing" H3 as a style fix, the operator executed it, and the injector then shipped a duplicated CTA (post 38418). Placement observations belong in notes.
- verify checks 29/30): never spend a would_change item on their existence, copy,
or HEADING -- all three 2026-07-06 reviewers burned a slot this way. The headings
are NOT a fixed list (
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 158 lines · 66 tokens per session scan A b71c6ac67b10
reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository XuanRanL/loamwright-SEO-Skill (47 stars, last pushed 23d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 66 tokens to every session and 1,660 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
schema-generator
Structured-data specialist. Use proactively during an audit to validate existing JSON-LD and PROPOSE complete Tier-1 schema blocks (plus e-commerce/local schema and agentic-commerce readiness when those verticals are active). It proposes diffs only and does NOT write files.
seo-fixer-writer
The ONLY agent allowed to write files. Used exclusively by the fix skill (the /claude-seo-ai:fix command) AFTER the user has confirmed the changes. Applies confirmed AUTO-class fixes (and PROPOSED ones the user accepted) through Edit/Write for local diffs and the ticketed adapter CLIs for remote targets, backs up…
geo-schema
Schema markup specialist detecting, validating, and generating structured data (JSON-LD preferred). Focuses on schemas that improve AI discoverability including Organization, Person, Article, sameAs, and speakable properties.
geo-citability
AI citability scoring and optimization specialist. Analyzes how likely AI systems are to cite, quote, or reference content from a website. Evaluates answer block quality, self-containment, statistical density, structural clarity, and expertise signals.
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.