Seo page experience

Page Experience Self-Assessment

<!-- Updated: 2026-06-10 -->

Google retired the standalone "page experience ranking signal" framing. Per https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/page-experience there is no single page experience signal — Google's core ranking systems look at a variety of signals that align with overall page experience. Of these, Core Web Vitals are used by ranking systems; other aspects (HTTPS, interstitials, mobile usability) don't directly boost rankings but make the site more satisfying to use, which aligns with what ranking systems reward. Evaluation is generally page-specific, with some site-wide assessments.

This skill runs Google's own self-assessment question list against a URL.

Google's Self-Assessment Questions

#	Question	How this skill checks it
1	Do your pages have good Core Web Vitals?	Delegate to seo-core-web-vitals skill (field data at p75)
2	Are your pages served in a secure fashion?	HTTPS, redirect, certificate, mixed content
3	Does your content display well on mobile devices?	Viewport meta, responsive markup, font size, tap targets
4	Does your content avoid excessive ads that distract from or interfere with the main content?	Ad density heuristics on HTML (manual confirmation advised)
5	Do your pages avoid using intrusive interstitials?	Interstitial heuristics on initial HTML
6	Can visitors easily distinguish the main content from other content?	Above-fold content prominence, labeled ads

Inputs

Input	Required	Notes
URL	Yes	Single page; page experience is evaluated per page
Mobile or desktop focus	No	Default mobile — interstitial rules target mobile entry from search

Execution

1. Fetch the page and check HTTPS:

   curl -sI -L -w 'final_url=%{url_effective} http=%{http_code}\n' http://<host><path>
   curl -s -o /dev/null -w '%{http_code}' https://<url>
   

   • http:// must 301-redirect to https:// (single hop ideal).
   • Certificate valid (curl -v shows no TLS errors).
   • Scan HTML for mixed content: http:// URLs in src=, href of stylesheets, srcset.

2. Check mobile usability on the fetched HTML:

   • <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width..."> present.
   • No fixed-width layouts (width=1024 style viewports, large fixed px containers).
   • Base font size ≥ 12px legible (16px recommended); tap targets ~48x48px.
   • For deeper checks, cross-reference the seo-technical skill (category 5).

3. Run interstitial heuristics on the initial HTML (the case Google penalizes is a pop-up covering the main content when a user enters from mobile search):

   • Fixed/absolute full-viewport overlays in initial HTML: elements with position:fixed or position:absolute combined with top:0 + width:100%/100vw + height:100%/100vh, high z-index.
   • Modal markers present at load: class/id containing modal, popup, overlay, interstitial, lightbox outside obvious consent managers; <dialog open>.
   • Body scroll-lock at load: overflow:hidden on html/body in initial CSS.
   • Redirects to a separate consent/input page (Google calls this out explicitly as a mistake — it can remove all but that page from results).
   • Flag findings as suspected — heuristics on static HTML can't see JS-triggered timing; recommend a real mobile-device check.

4. Classify any interstitial found per https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/avoid-intrusive-interstitials:

   Type	Verdict
   Full-page promo/app-install interstitial covering main content on entry	❌ Intrusive
   Dialog obscuring part of the content for promotion	⚠️ Risky — prefer a banner
   Legally mandated (cookie consent, age gate)	✅ Exempt — but overlay content, don't redirect; for adult age gates, consider serving verified Googlebot without the gate
   Login wall for genuinely gated content	✅ Exempt
   Small, easily dismissible banner (e.g., Smart App Banner, newsletter strip)	✅ Fine — Google's recommended pattern

5. Assess content prominence and ads:

   • Is meaningful main content present in the initial HTML above the fold, or is the first viewport dominated by ads/promos/navigation?
   • Are ad containers distinguishable/labeled (e.g., "Advertisement", aria-label, distinct containers)?
   • Count ad-network script includes (adsbygoogle, GPT, taboola, outbrain, mgid) as an ad-pressure signal. These are heuristics — note that final judgment needs visual review.

6. Delegate CWV measurement to the seo-core-web-vitals skill and import its PASS/FAIL verdict for question 1. Do not duplicate the measurement here.

7. Optional speed-up note: if the site is a publisher with heavy search-entry traffic, mention Signed Exchanges (SXG) as a way to let Google prefetch content and improve effective LCP from search (https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/signed-exchange).

Quick Reference — Pass Criteria

Check	Pass threshold
HTTPS	http→https 301 in ≤1 hop, valid cert, zero mixed-content URLs
Viewport	width=device-width viewport meta in initial HTML
Font size	≥60% of text ≥12px (16px base recommended)
Tap targets	~48x48px with ~8px spacing
Interstitials	No non-exempt full-page overlay in initial HTML
Ad pressure	Main content begins above the fold; ads labeled

Useful companion tools (from Google's resources list): Search Console's HTTPS report and Core Web Vitals report, and Chrome Lighthouse (https://developer.chrome.com/docs/lighthouse/overview) for mobile-usability and page-experience improvement hints.

Output

# Page Experience Self-Assessment: <url>

## Google's Six Questions
| # | Question | Verdict | Evidence |
|---|----------|---------|----------|
| 1 | Good Core Web Vitals? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | from seo-core-web-vitals (p75 field data) |
| 2 | Served securely (HTTPS)? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | https enforced, cert valid, no mixed content |
| 3 | Displays well on mobile? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | viewport meta, font size, tap targets |
| 4 | Avoids excessive ads? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | N ad scripts, above-fold ad pressure |
| 5 | Avoids intrusive interstitials? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | overlays found / exempt types |
| 6 | Main content distinguishable? | ✅/⚠️/❌ | above-fold content vs ads/nav |

Overall: X/6 yes — "Answering yes to these questions means you're probably
on track in providing a good page experience."

## Findings Detail
### HTTPS  (redirect chain, certificate, mixed content list)
### Mobile usability  (specific failures with code locations)
### Interstitials  (each suspected overlay: selector, type, verdict per the
    classification table, recommended replacement — banner pattern)
### Ads & content prominence  (observations + manual-review note)

## Recommendations (prioritized)
1. ...

## Context
- No single "page experience signal" exists; CWV is used by ranking systems,
  other aspects improve user satisfaction rather than rankings directly.
- Evaluation is page-specific (with some site-wide assessments) — re-run on
  templates that differ (home, article, product).
- Source: https://developers.google.com/search/docs/appearance/page-experience