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.
npx skills add tmj-90/gaffer --skill seo-auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tmj-90/gafferWrote 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/skills/tmj-90/gaffer/seo-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tmj-90/gaffer/seo-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tmj-90/gaffer/seo-audit/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/skills/tmj-90/gaffer/seo-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tmj-90/gaffer/seo-audit.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 | $0.00078 | $0.01059 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00039 | $0.00530 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00212 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00106 |
Grade A, and why
seo-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 6d 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 — 70 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Audit SEO systematically
Three layers in impact order: technical (crawl/index/speed) → on-page (titles/headings/links) → content (intent match / E-E-A-T / thin pages). Fix the highest layer first.
Core Web Vitals pass/fail thresholds (75th percentile real-user data)
| Metric | Good | Needs work | Poor |
|---|---|---|---|
| LCP | ≤ 2.5s | 2.5–4.0s | > 4.0s |
| INP | ≤ 200ms | 200–500ms | > 500ms |
| CLS | ≤ 0.1 | 0.1–0.25 | > 0.25 |
Technical layer (check first)
- Crawlability —
robots.txtnot blocking important paths; XML sitemap present and submitted to Search Console; no orphan pages (no internal links). - Indexation —
noindexnot set on pages that should rank; canonical tags point to the correct URL; HTTPS on all pages. - Speed — LCP from real-user data (Search Console → Core Web Vitals report); identify LCP element; check image optimisation + CDN + render-blocking resources.
- Mobile — Google uses mobile-first indexing; test with Mobile-Friendly Test.
On-page layer
- Title tags — ≤ 60 chars; primary keyword near the front; unique per page; describes content accurately.
- Meta descriptions — ≤ 160 chars; includes a CTA-like phrase; unique per page.
- H1 — one per page; matches or closely mirrors the title tag; primary keyword present.
- Heading hierarchy — H1 → H2 → H3 without gaps; no keyword stuffing.
- Internal linking — key pages linked from multiple internal pages; anchor text descriptive (not "click here").
Content layer
- Search intent match — is the page format what the searcher expects? (Informational → guide/article; transactional → product/pricing page; navigational → homepage).
- E-E-A-T signals — author bio with credentials; publication date + last-updated date; primary-source citations; specific examples and data.
- Thin/duplicate content — pages with < 300 words of unique content; pages with duplicated sections across the site.
- Keyword targeting — primary keyword in title + H1 + first 100 words + URL slug; LSI terms used naturally in body.
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 70 lines · 78 tokens per session scan A 2c425814e9a0
seo-audit is a skill published in the GitHub repository tmj-90/gaffer (2 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 78 tokens to every session and 1,059 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
bulwark-brainstorm
Role-based brainstorming with dual modes: --scoped (sequential Task tool, 5 roles) and --exploratory (Agent Teams peer debate, 4 roles). Use for feasibility assessment and idea validation.
plan-creation
Create structured implementation plans via a 4-role scrum team (Product Owner, Architect, Eng/Delivery Lead, QA/Critic) with optional Agent Teams peer debate mode.
anthropic-validator
Validates Claude Code assets (skills, hooks, agents, commands, MCP servers, plugins) against official Anthropic standards. Fetches latest docs dynamically and produces structured validation reports.
create-subagent
Generates single-purpose Claude Code sub-agents for use via the Task tool. Use when creating dedicated sub-agents, scaffolding agent definitions, or generating agents with diagnostics and permissions setup.
test-audit
Audit test suites for T1-T4 violations using AST analysis, mock detection, and multi-stage synthesis. Invoke when user asks to audit tests, check test quality, find mock violations, review test effectiveness, or inspect test suites for over-mocking. Triggers automatic rewrites when quality gates fail.
code-review
Comprehensive code review with distinct aspect based sections. Use when reviewing code, checking for security issues, finding type safety problems, auditing code quality, or when user asks to review code, PRs or changes. Three-phase workflow runs static tools, LLM judgment, and writes diagnostic log.