agentsclimarketplace

Keyword research

Skill sanky369/vibe-building-skills/skills/marketing/keyword-research

Open-source agent skills library for building SaaS, marketing systems, creative assets, and frontend design workflows

Install
npx -y skills add sanky369/vibe-building-skills --skill keyword-research

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

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Build a prioritized keyword cluster map using the 6 Circles Method — keywords at the intersection of positioning alignment, customer language, competitor blind spots, workable search volume, real expertise, and business intent. Use when the user asks 'what keywords should I target', 'what should I write about', 'find SEO opportunities', 'plan my content strategy', 'what does my audience search for', or before any SEO content is written. Produces a Keyword Map: scored keywords grouped into topic clusters, each cluster mapped to the article that should target it, ready to hand to content production.

SKILL.md

7.6 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Keyword Research

Produce a keyword map: a scored, clustered list of search terms worth targeting, each tied to the content that should win it. Governing principle: a keyword is only worth targeting if it survives all six circles — aligned with the positioning, phrased in the customer's language, under-served by competitors, actually searched, winnable with the user's real expertise, and connected to revenue. Traffic that fails circle 6 is vanity.

When to use / when not to

  • Use before writing SEO content, when planning a content calendar, or when the user wants to know what their audience searches for.
  • If no positioning statement exists, run skills/marketing/positioning-angles first (or infer a provisional one and label it) — circle 1 is unworkable without it.
  • If the user wants the full organic program — link building, technical SEO, programmatic pages, domain authority — use skills/marketing/seo-strategy; this skill is the keyword-selection layer only.
  • If keywords already exist and the user wants the article written, go straight to skills/marketing/seo-content.

Intake

One batch; reuse anything already produced by skills/marketing/orchestrator or skills/marketing/positioning-angles:

  1. Your positioning statement (or: what you sell, to whom, and what makes it different).
  2. Your 2–3 closest competitors' websites.
  3. Any sources of raw customer language — support tickets, sales calls, reviews, community threads — or paste examples of how customers describe the problem.
  4. Site status: domain age, roughly how much content published, any current rankings? (Determines how competitive a keyword you can win.)
  5. Access to a keyword tool (Ahrefs, Semrush, Google Keyword Planner)? If yes, the user runs volume lookups when asked; if no, proceed with estimates.

Don't stall: with a positioning statement and a recognizable market you can draft the full map from knowledge and web research — label all volumes and difficulty as estimates and list them for the user to verify in a tool.

Workflow — the 6 Circles Method

Run the circles as sequential filters: generate wide in circles 1–2, then cut in 3–6.

Circle 1 — Positioning alignment (seed)

Expand the positioning statement into 20–40 seed keywords. Take each element of the claim (audience, problem, mechanism, outcome) and list the searches that element implies. Rule: seeds come from the angle, not the category. "Project management tool for remote teams" seeds remote-team keywords (async standups, distributed team communication), not generic project management keywords the incumbents own.

Circle 2 — Customer language (rephrase)

Rewrite every seed in the words customers actually type, harvested from the intake sources. Kill jargon: if customers say "remote work tools", drop "distributed workforce management solutions". Add the question-form variants ("how do I…", "best X for Y", "X vs Y") — those carry the clearest intent.

Circle 3 — Competitor blind spots (cut or boost)

Check each surviving keyword against the competitors' content (crawl their blog/sitemap or search site:competitor.com <keyword>).

  • Competitors rank with strong, current content → cut, unless the user has a decisively better asset.
  • Competitors ignore it or cover it thinly/outdated → boost priority. These gaps are the map's best entries.

Circle 4 — Search volume (screen)

Screen for workable volume. Heuristic (label it as such): target roughly 100–10,000 searches/month — below ~100 rarely repays an article; above ~10,000 is usually incumbent territory for a young domain. Decision rules: established domain with authority (from intake Q4) → the upper bound relaxes; brand-new domain → stay in the low hundreds-to-low-thousands band. If no tool access, estimate from autocomplete breadth, "People also ask" density, and ad presence — and flag every estimate.

Circle 5 — Expertise (cut)

Keep only keywords where the user can honestly out-write the current top results — first-hand experience, proprietary data, a named mechanism, or a sharper niche take. If the user can't add anything the top 3 results lack, cut the keyword regardless of volume.

Circle 6 — Business intent (score)

Score what remains by distance to revenue:

  • High: buying/comparison intent — "best X for Y", "X vs Y", "X pricing", "X alternative".
  • Medium: problem-aware how-tos the offer solves — "how to manage remote teams".
  • Low: informational adjacency — "remote work statistics". Keep low-intent keywords only as cluster support, never as the cluster head.

Cluster and prioritize

Group survivors into topic clusters (one head keyword + 3–8 supporting keywords that one strong article or hub can cover). Priority order: high intent + competitor blind spot first, then high intent + contested, then medium intent gaps. Propose the top 3–5 clusters and have the user confirm the order before content production starts.

Required output format

# Keyword Map — [Brand]

**Positioning it serves:** "[claim from skills/marketing/positioning-angles]"
**Volume/difficulty source:** [tool name | estimates — user to verify]

## Priority clusters
### Cluster 1: [name] — Priority: HIGH
Target article: "[working title]" — intent: [high/med] — feeds: [lead magnet / product page]
| Keyword | Role | Est. volume | Competition note | Intent |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [head keyword] | Head | ~N/mo | [gap / thin / contested] | High |
| [supporting] | Support | ... | ... | ... |

### Cluster 2: ...
(3–5 clusters total)

## Cut list (why keywords were rejected)
- "[keyword]" — failed circle [n]: [one-line reason]
(representative sample, not exhaustive)

## Assumptions & verification queue
- [every estimated volume or inferred competitor read, listed for tool verification]

**Next step:** write Cluster 1's target article via skills/marketing/seo-content.

Quality bar (check before delivering)

  • Every cluster head passed all six circles; the failing circle is named for every cut shown.
  • No cluster head is a generic category term the incumbents own.
  • Every keyword uses customer phrasing — zero internal jargon survives.
  • All volumes labeled with their source; estimates explicitly flagged, never presented as tool data.
  • Every cluster names the article that targets it and the business asset it feeds.
  • 3–5 clusters delivered, priority-ordered and user-confirmed — not an undifferentiated keyword dump.

Integration

  • Upstream: skills/marketing/positioning-angles supplies the claim that seeds circle 1; skills/marketing/orchestrator routes here on awareness and scale paths.
  • Downstream: skills/marketing/seo-content consumes the cluster map one cluster at a time (head keyword + supports + working title cross the boundary); skills/marketing/seo-strategy consumes it as the keyword layer of a full program; skills/marketing/content-atomizer uses cluster themes to steer repurposing.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. 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.