/seo-content-audit

name: seo-content-audit
description: "Audit existing content across a site to decide what to keep, update, merge, redirect, or delete. Use this skill whenever the user wants to audit existing content, fix content decay, resolve keyword cannibalization, prune underperforming pages, prioritize content updates, or apply a keep/update/merge/redirect/delete framework to a content library. Triggers on content audit, content decay, content refresh, cannibalization, keyword cannibalization, prune content, delete pages, redirect old pages, content inventory, what to keep, what to update, content scorecard, evergreen refresh. Also triggers when traffic is dropping site-wide and the cause might be content quality, even if 'audit' is not said explicitly."
category: seo-foundation
catalog_summary: "Keep/update/merge/redirect/delete decisions across a site"
display_order: 6

Content Audit

Inventory existing content, score it, and decide for each piece: keep, update, merge, redirect, or delete. Stack-agnostic. Works on blogs, marketing sites, knowledge bases, and product content.

---

When to use

• Inheriting a content library you did not create
• Diagnosing site-wide traffic decline
• Resolving cannibalization (two pages competing for the same query)
• Pre-migration cleanup
• Annual or semi-annual content health check
• Pruning before a redesign or replatform

When NOT to use

• Optimizing a single page (use `seo-onpage`)
• Planning new content (use `seo-keyword`)
• Comparing your content to competitors (use `seo-competitor`)
• Site-level technical issues (use `seo-technical`)

---

Required inputs

• The site URL and access to crawl it (or a complete URL list)
• Search console access (or a 12-month export)
• Analytics access (sessions, conversions, engagement)
• A backlink tool (to identify pages with referring domains worth preserving)

---

The framework: 5 actions

For every content piece, the audit produces one of five decisions.

1. Keep

The page performs well, has clear intent, and needs no changes.

**Signals:**

• Top 10 ranking for its primary query
• Consistent traffic with no decay
• Healthy engagement (above-site-average time on page or interaction rate)
• Up-to-date information

2. Update

The page has potential but is underperforming due to fixable issues.

**Signals:**

• Page 2 ranking for high-value queries (rank 11 to 30)
• Traffic decay over the last 6 to 12 months
• Information gone stale
• Title or meta need rewriting for CTR
• Thin content that could expand to match competitor depth
• Missing schema or other technical hygiene

3. Merge

Two or more pages target overlapping queries and should consolidate.

**Signals:**

• Cannibalization (multiple pages ranking for the same query, none ranking well)
• Significant content overlap between pages
• Combined, they would outperform either alone
• Both have backlinks worth preserving

4. Redirect

The page has no future but has assets (links, equity) worth preserving.

**Signals:**

• No traffic, no rankings
• Holds backlinks (especially editorial ones)
• A relevant target page exists that would benefit from the equity
• Topic is still relevant but this specific page is not

5. Delete (and let return 404 or 410)

The page has no future and no assets worth preserving.

**Signals:**

• No traffic, no rankings, no backlinks
• Content is outdated and not worth updating
• Topic is no longer relevant
• Even thin or spam content from a previous era

Note: In most cases, return 410 (gone) for intentionally deleted content. 410 is processed faster than 404 and signals the deletion was deliberate.

---

Scoring inputs

Pull these for every URL before deciding:

| Metric | Source | Threshold for "low" | |---|---|---| | Sessions (last 90 days) | Analytics | <10/month | | Organic traffic (last 90 days) | Search console or analytics | <5/month | | Average position for top query | Search console | >30 | | Impressions (last 90 days) | Search console | <100/month | | Click-through rate | Search console | <1% (when impressions exist) | | Referring domains | Backlink tool | 0 | | Engagement (avg time on page) | Analytics | <30 seconds | | Last meaningful update | Manual / git | >24 months | | Word count | Crawler | <300 (for articles) | | Internal links in | Crawler | 0 |

A page can survive low scores on a few metrics. A page that fails on most is a delete or redirect candidate.

---

Decision matrix

A simplified decision tree:

Has traffic? ─── Yes ──── Recent decay? ─── Yes ── UPDATE
        │                          │
        │                          └── No ─── KEEP
        │
        └── No ──── Has backlinks? ─── Yes ── Has relevant target? ─── Yes ── REDIRECT
                          │                            │
                          │                            └── No ─── UPDATE (rebuild)
                          │
                          └── No ──── Cannibalizing another page? ─── Yes ── MERGE
                                              │
                                              └── No ─── DELETE (410)

For overlapping pages, "merge" usually wins over "delete" because it preserves both link equity and any topical authority.

---

Workflow

1. **Inventory.** Pull a complete URL list from the crawl, sitemap, and search console (some indexed pages may not be in the sitemap). 2. **Pull the metrics.** Sessions, organic, search console rank/CTR, backlinks, last-modified date, word count. 3. **Score each URL.** Use the framework. Mark a decision: Keep / Update / Merge / Redirect / Delete. 4. **Identify cannibalization clusters.** Group URLs targeting the same query. Decide which becomes the canonical, what to merge, what to redirect. 5. **Sequence the work.** Do redirects and deletes in batches. Plan updates by priority (highest-traffic-recovery potential first). 6. **Implement.** With change tracking. Re-crawl after each batch to confirm no broken redirect chains. 7. **Measure.**