agentsclimarketplace

Content audit

Skill brainbytes-dev/everything-claude-marketing/skills/content/content-audit

Audit existing content for quality, performance, and optimization opportunities. Use when inheriting a content library or planning content strategy refreshes.From its SKILL.md

Install
npx -y skills add brainbytes-dev/everything-claude-marketing --skill content-audit

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 5 stars5 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

SKILL.md

10.0 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Content Audit

When to Activate

  • Inheriting a content library from a predecessor or acquisition
  • Content program has been running for 12+ months without a review
  • Organic traffic is declining or stagnating
  • Planning a site redesign, migration, or rebrand that affects content
  • Suspected content cannibalization (multiple pages competing for the same keyword)
  • Building a content strategy that needs to account for what already exists
  • Stakeholders question the ROI of content marketing

First Questions

  1. How many content pieces exist? (Blog posts, landing pages, guides, resources?)
  2. What analytics access do you have? (Google Analytics, Search Console, CMS analytics?)
  3. What is the primary goal of the content program? (Traffic, leads, conversions, brand?)
  4. When was content last reviewed or updated systematically?
  5. How many authors have contributed, and are they still with the organization?
  6. Is there known content that is outdated, inaccurate, or off-brand?
  7. What CMS is used, and can content be bulk-exported for analysis?

Content Inventory Methodology

Step 1: Export Everything

Pull a complete list of published content. For each piece, capture:

URL
Title
Publish date
Last modified date
Author
Content type (blog, guide, case study, landing page, etc.)
Word count
Content pillar/category
Primary keyword (if known)

Sources: CMS export, sitemap.xml (for URL list), Screaming Frog crawl (for metadata), Google Analytics (for performance data), Google Search Console (for search data).

Step 2: Add Performance Data

For each piece, pull metrics for the trailing 12 months:

MetricSourceWhy It Matters
Organic sessionsGoogle AnalyticsSearch-driven visibility
Total pageviewsGoogle AnalyticsOverall reach
Avg. time on pageGoogle AnalyticsEngagement depth
Bounce rateGoogle AnalyticsContent relevance
Conversions/goalsGoogle AnalyticsBusiness impact
ImpressionsGoogle Search ConsoleSearch visibility
ClicksGoogle Search ConsoleSearch traffic
Avg. positionGoogle Search ConsoleRanking performance
Top queriesGoogle Search ConsoleWhat the page ranks for
BacklinksAhrefs/SEMrushAuthority and link equity
Social sharesBuzzSumo/native analyticsSocial reach

Step 3: Add Quality Scores

For each piece, manually assess (or sample for large libraries):

Quality DimensionScore (1-5)Criteria
AccuracyIs the information current and correct?
RelevanceDoes this still serve a business goal and audience need?
CompletenessDoes it cover the topic thoroughly?
Brand alignmentDoes it match current voice, positioning, and visual standards?
SEO optimizationIs it structured for search (headings, meta, internal links)?
ReadabilityIs it well-written, scannable, and engaging?
Visual qualityAre images, formatting, and media current and functional?

Scoring and Decision Framework

Content Score Calculation

Combine performance and quality into a single score:

Content Score = (Performance Score × 0.6) + (Quality Score × 0.4)

Performance Score = weighted average of:
  - Organic traffic (30%)
  - Conversions (30%)
  - Engagement (time on page, bounce rate) (20%)
  - Backlinks (20%)

Quality Score = average of 7 quality dimensions (1-5 scale, normalized to 100)

Adjust weights based on your program's primary goal (traffic-focused programs weight organic higher, conversion-focused programs weight conversions higher).

The Four Decisions

Every piece of content gets one of four decisions:

DecisionCriteriaAction
KeepHigh performance + high qualityNo action needed. Monitor.
UpdateHigh performance + declining quality, OR high potential + quality gapsRefresh content, update data, improve SEO, add visuals.
MergeMultiple pages covering the same topic (cannibalization)Combine into one stronger page. Redirect the others.
Archive/DeleteLow performance + low quality + no strategic valueRemove from site (301 redirect to relevant page if it has backlinks).

Decision Matrix

                    HIGH QUALITY
                         │
         KEEP            │         UPDATE
    (monitor, promote)   │    (refresh, improve)
                         │
 ─────────────────────────────────────────── PERFORMANCE
                         │
         MERGE           │         ARCHIVE
    (consolidate)        │    (remove/redirect)
                         │
                    LOW QUALITY

Content Gap Analysis

After auditing what exists, identify what is missing:

Gap Identification Methods

  1. Keyword gap. Compare your keyword rankings to competitors. What do they rank for that you do not? (Use Ahrefs Content Gap or SEMrush Keyword Gap.)
  2. Topic gap. Map your content to your content pillars. Which pillars are underserved?
  3. Funnel gap. Map content to buyer journey stages (awareness → consideration → decision). Is one stage underfed?
  4. Format gap. Do you only have blog posts? Missing video, interactive tools, templates, or downloadable resources?
  5. Audience gap. Map content to audience segments. Is one persona getting all the content while another gets none?
  6. Question gap. Review "People Also Ask," customer support tickets, and sales call notes. What questions are unanswered by your content?

Gap Prioritization

For each identified gap, score:

FactorScore (1-5)
Business impact (tied to revenue or key goal)
Audience demand (search volume, question frequency)
Competitive opportunity (competitors are weak here)
Feasibility (can you create this with available resources)

Prioritize gaps with the highest combined score.

Audit Spreadsheet Template

| URL | Title | Type | Pillar | Publish Date | Last Updated | Word Count | Author |
|-----|-------|------|--------|-------------|-------------|------------|--------|

| Organic Sessions (12mo) | Conversions (12mo) | Avg Position | Top Query | Backlinks |
|--------------------------|---------------------|-------------|-----------|-----------|

| Accuracy (1-5) | Relevance (1-5) | Completeness (1-5) | Brand Alignment (1-5) |
|-----------------|------------------|---------------------|----------------------|

| SEO (1-5) | Readability (1-5) | Visual Quality (1-5) | Overall Score | Decision |
|------------|--------------------|-----------------------|---------------|----------|

| Action Items | Priority | Owner | Deadline |
|-------------|----------|-------|----------|

Recommended Tabs

  1. Inventory — Full content list with metadata
  2. Performance — Analytics data
  3. Quality Assessment — Manual scores
  4. Decisions — Keep/Update/Merge/Archive with action items
  5. Gaps — Identified content gaps with prioritization
  6. Dashboard — Summary statistics and charts

Prioritization Framework for Updates

When the audit reveals dozens of pieces needing updates, prioritize with this framework:

Quick Wins (Do First)

  • Pages ranking positions 5-15 for valuable keywords (close to page 1 — small improvements yield big results)
  • High-traffic pages with outdated information (risk of losing rankings)
  • Pages with high impressions but low CTR (meta title/description optimization)

Medium Effort (Do Next)

  • Pages with good backlinks but weak content (the authority is there, content needs to catch up)
  • Content cannibalization situations (merging pages)
  • Pages targeting valuable keywords but ranking 15-30 (need significant content improvement)

Strategic Investments (Plan for Later)

  • Major content gaps identified in gap analysis
  • New pillar pages or topic clusters to build
  • Content format expansions (first video, first interactive tool)

Audit Cadence

Audit TypeFrequencyScope
Full auditAnnuallyEvery piece of content
Performance reviewQuarterlyTop 50 pages + bottom 20 pages
Freshness checkMonthlyContent published 12+ months ago in high-priority pillars
New content review30 days post-publishEvery new piece (is it performing to expectations?)

Common Pitfalls

  1. Auditing without a goal. An audit should answer a specific question: What should we update? What should we cut? Where are the gaps? Without a question, it is just data collection.
  2. Only looking at traffic. A page with low traffic but high conversion rate may be more valuable than a viral blog post that converts nobody.
  3. Deleting without redirecting. Removing content without 301 redirects to relevant pages wastes accumulated link equity and creates dead ends.
  4. Auditing but not acting. The audit is worthless without an action plan with owners and deadlines.
  5. One-time exercise. Content audits should be recurring, not a one-time project.
  6. Ignoring content outside the blog. Landing pages, help docs, product pages, and email templates are content too.

Quality Gate

Before considering a content audit complete:

  • Full content inventory is compiled with metadata for every published piece
  • Performance data covers at least 12 months of analytics
  • Quality scoring is applied consistently (same criteria, same scale)
  • Every piece has a decision: Keep, Update, Merge, or Archive
  • Content gaps are identified with prioritization scores
  • Update priorities are ranked (quick wins, medium effort, strategic)
  • Action items have owners and deadlines
  • Redirect plan exists for any content being archived or merged
  • Findings are summarized for stakeholders (not just a raw spreadsheet)
  • Next audit date is scheduled

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 628,853. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.