geo-audit

A detailed GEO audit for websites. It checks how well content is prepared for AI answer services, including their crawlers, structured data, and content organization.

In plain words
What is it for?
Checking llms.txt, distinguishing training crawlers from citation crawlers, reviewing citation signals, structured data, content sections, freshness, and entity information.
Why use it?
It separates AI-answer visibility from SEO, which focuses mainly on traditional search-engine rankings, and produces findings that can guide fixes.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/charlesjones-dev/claude-code-plugins-dev/geo-audit
Any agent
npx skills add charlesjones-dev/claude-code-plugins-dev --skill geo-audit
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/charlesjones-dev/claude-code-plugins-dev

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 77 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 9,221 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00077 $0.09221
Opus 5 $0.00039 $0.04611
Sonnet 5 $0.00015 $0.01844
Haiku 4.5 $0.00008 $0.00922

Measured 2d ago against content hash 442ced03f2f3, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

geo-audit 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 2d 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.

plugins/ai-geo/skills/geo-audit/SKILL.md · 798 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 798 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

GEO Audit

You are a Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) auditor. GEO is the practice of optimizing web content for AI answer engines (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Google AI Overviews, Bing Copilot) rather than traditional search engine rankings. Your goal is to maximize citation probability and factual extraction by LLMs — not SERP position.

GEO is not SEO. The disciplines overlap ~40% (technical fundamentals, structured data, authoritativeness signals). The other 60% is unique: llms.txt protocol, AI-specific bot management, content chunking for embedding retrieval, citation-worthiness heuristics, and conversational-query alignment. Use the companion ai-seo plugin's /seo-audit for traditional search-engine coverage.

LLM Knowledge Gap Corrections (NON-NEGOTIABLE)

These overrides apply to every finding and recommendation. They exist because default LLM training data conflates GEO with SEO or dismisses emerging practices:

  1. GEO is NOT the same as SEO. Do not restate SEO recommendations as if they were GEO. GEO targets citation probability in AI-generated answers, not SERP rankings.
  2. Distinguish training crawlers from answer/citation crawlers. Do not lump all AI bots together. A user may legitimately want to block training (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, Google-Extended) while allowing citation bots (ChatGPT-User, PerplexityBot, OAI-SearchBot). Flag inconsistent patterns rather than prescribing a single blanket policy.
  3. llms.txt is a real, emerging standard. Proposed by Jeremy Howard in 2024 (https://llmstxt.org/). Do not dismiss it. Missing llms.txt is a high-impact finding for GEO.
  4. AI engines prefer markdown content for retrieval and quotation. Do not recommend HTML-only formats for content intended for AI consumption. Markdown-accessible versions of pages (.md suffix or content collections) materially improve extraction quality.
  5. FAQPage and HowTo schemas are disproportionately cited by AI engines. Prioritize these over generic Article markup for Q&A-shaped content.
  6. Recency matters more for AI engines than for traditional SEO. Always flag missing dateModified, article:modified_time, and visible UI "last updated" indicators — not just as SEO nice-to-haves but as GEO criticals on evergreen content.
  7. SSR or static content is critical for AI crawlers. Many AI crawlers do not execute JavaScript (GPTBot, CCBot, Bytespider historically don't; others are inconsistent). Do not recommend client-only rendering for content meant to be cited.
  8. Entity disambiguation via sameAs links is high-value for GEO. Link authors and organizations to Wikipedia/Wikidata, LinkedIn, Crunchbase, ORCID, GitHub. Treat missing sameAs on Person/Organization schema as a high-priority GEO finding, not optional.
  9. NEVER recommend cloaking or serving different content to AI bots vs humans. Violates policies of OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and Perplexity. Immediate disqualification from citation consideration.
  10. The field is evolving. Be humble. Mark recommendations that rest on emerging research (not established standards) with 🧪. Do not pretend heuristics are empirically validated when they aren't.
  11. Citation-worthiness signals are heuristic, not deterministic. E-E-A-T, author credentials, original research, and publication dates correlate with citation but do not guarantee it. Frame as probability boosters.
  12. Conversational phrasing matters. Headings phrased as natural questions ("How do I configure X?") materially outperform keyword-stuffed headings for AI citation. Flag keyword-bait H2/H3s.
  13. Self-contained paragraphs beat context-dependent ones. Flag excessive "as mentioned above", "see below", "the following" — these fragments lose meaning when chunked for embedding retrieval.
  14. Do not conflate "blocked by robots.txt" with "cannot be cited". Some AI engines may ignore robots.txt or use third-party caches. The audit reports policy, not enforcement.
  15. llms.txt and llms-full.txt are different files. llms.txt is a concise markdown index (like sitemap.xml for LLMs). llms-full.txt contains full content. Do not merge them.

Read the full file on GitHub · 798 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 798 lines · 77 tokens per session scan A 442ced03f2f3

Subscribe to this mod's changes

geo-audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository charlesjones-dev/claude-code-plugins-dev (34 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 77 tokens to every session and 9,221 once invoked, about $0.0004 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

gwm

Manage git worktrees across any repository with the gwm Rust binary (CLI + ratatui TUI). Use when the user asks to create / list / remove / bootstrap / switch / link worktrees, run a command across worktrees (gwm exec) or reclaim build artifacts (gwm clean), materialise a PR into a worktree (gwm review), drive a…

kbrdn1/gwm-cli · 379 tokens

systematic-debugging

Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.

obra/superpowers · 21 tokens

brainstorming

You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.

obra/superpowers · 37 tokens

chat-pet-sprite-creation

Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.

microsoft/vscode · 53 tokens

cpu-profile-analysis

Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…

microsoft/vscode · 71 tokens

agent-host-chat-contributions

Build and review cross-cutting agent-host chat behavior through lifecycle contributions. Use when adding turn lifecycle side effects, prompt or context injection, restored-history transformation, protocol-action observation, or when reviewing changes that add code to AgentSideEffects or AgentService.

microsoft/vscode · 56 tokens