What does this skill do, and when should you use it?
Content Quality Auditor is the SEO/GEO quality gate in Aaron Marketing Skills for reviewing content quality, E-E-A-T, and publish readiness. It evaluates one content artifact through a typed 80-item CORE-EEAT profile, including evidence coverage and qualified veto checks. The report provides typed item states, score information when coverage is complete, a SHIP/FIX/BLOCK/UNDECIDED verdict, and a prioritized fix plan. Missing applicable evidence produces NEEDS_INPUT/UNDECIDED rather than an invented score.
Reads one URL, draft, or stable artifact identifier together with cited and source-credibility controls; uses WebFetch for URL or page evidence; requires the target, content type, market, publication state, and observation date to be declared; evaluates all 80 CORE-EEAT items with source, observed date, evidence type, and confidence; checks qualified vetoes for material title or promise mismatch, material internal contradiction, and missing or obscured disclosure; invokes the repository's Python scorer and validator when the verified runtime is available; and produces a typed audit report with coverage, uncertainty, findings, and a fix plan.
- An editorial team is preparing a product review and needs to verify E-E-A-T evidence, citations, and commercial disclosures before publication.
- An SEO/GEO team is rerunning an audit after making evidence-backed fixes to a blog post.
- An editor is reviewing a comparison page, how-to guide, FAQ, landing page, or testimonial for publish readiness.
- A team handling medical, legal, financial, or other high-risk content needs to check source currency, reviewer qualifications, claim boundaries, and disclaimers.
How do you install this skill?
- WebFetch, the scorer, validator, and audit paths were not executed; the described gate result is not independently verified.
- Full operation depends on repository-level references and a specific runtime; when unavailable, retain NOT_SCORED/UNDECIDED rather than calculating manually.
- For mainland-China users, target-URL reachability, robots.txt restrictions, and authorization must be confirmed separately before each audit.
- Shell / CLI
- Network access
- Local filesystem
Python 3Git
Install the repository in Claude Code with /plugin marketplace add aaron-he-zhu/aaron-marketing-skills, followed by /plugin install aaron-marketing@aaron. On other Agent Skills-compatible hosts, use npx skills add aaron-he-zhu/aaron-marketing-skills. A plain clone is also supported with git clone https://github.com/aaron-he-zhu/aaron-marketing-skills. The README documents the generic single-skill command format as npx skills add aaron-he-zhu/aaron-marketing-skills -s content-quality-auditor.
tmp="$(mktemp -d)"
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/aaron-he-zhu/aaron-marketing-skills.git "$tmp"
mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills
cp -R "$tmp/seo-geo/tune/content-quality-auditor" ~/.claude/skills/
rm -rf "$tmp"Generated from the source repository and skill path; it copies only this skill's folder. If the author's install steps above differ, follow those first. To scope it to one project, replace ~/.claude/skills with that project's .claude/skills.
How do you use this skill?
Provide a URL or paste the artifact and state its content type, market, and publication status. Example: Audit this product review for the U.S. market before publication: <URL or content>. The skill also requires a declared target and observation date; if the content type cannot be inferred safely, provide it explicitly. Deterministic scoring depends on the repository's runbook, scoring semantics, CORE-EEAT benchmark, framework catalog, scorer, and validator. If those runtime components are unavailable, it must return NOT_SCORED without a gate verdict or persistent artifact.
What are this skill's strengths and limitations?
- Focused on content quality and publish readiness rather than conflating structural SEO, technical SEO, or domain-level trust audits.
- Uses an 80-item CORE-EEAT contract with explicit Pass, Partial, Fail, Unknown, and conditional N/A states.
- Requires evidence provenance, dates, evidence types, and confidence, while checking material mismatch, contradiction, and disclosure vetoes.
- Preserves uncertainty when evidence is missing instead of fabricating a total score.
- Complete deterministic scoring depends on repository reference files, typed catalogs, the Python scorer, and the validator; an incomplete runtime yields an unscored result.
- A complete audit requires access to the artifact and its supporting evidence through WebFetch or user-provided material.
- It does not replace narrow on-page, technical SEO, or domain-authority audits.
- It cannot claim visual or mobile validation from HTML inference alone.
How does this skill compare with similar options?
Side by side with related skills; every score comes from the same FSRS standard.
| Skill | FS score | Stars | Last updated | License |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Content Quality Auditor this page | 57 · Use with care | ★ 3k | 13d ago | Apache-2.0 |
| Blog Rewrite Optimizer | 45 · Not recommended | ★ 2.4k | 13d ago | MIT |
| GEO Content Quality & E-E-A-T Assessment | 47 · Use with care | ★ 11k | 21d ago | MIT |
| Domain Authority Auditor | 65 · Recommended | ★ 3k | 13d ago | Apache-2.0 |
| RAMP Launch Readiness Auditor | 61 · Recommended | ★ 3k | 13d ago | Apache-2.0 |
How did FollowSkills review this skill?
The skill treats WebFetch content as untrusted data, limits reads to one artifact and source controls, and requires explicit authorization plus v3 validation for persistence. Deducted 7 points because per-fetch user confirmation is not explicit, external data flow and attribution remain environment-dependent, and rollback and sensitive-data handling are not fully specified by this skill itself.
The runtime contract, fail-closed behavior when runtimes are missing, Unknown handling, veto logic, and abnormal-input feedback are well defined. Deducted 2 points because it depends on multiple repository references, scripts, path resolution, and host capabilities; static review cannot reproduce key paths, and standalone mode explicitly cannot score.
Triggers, inputs, content profiles, market, publication state, and boundaries with adjacent auditors are clearly specified, with some Chinese-language labeling. Deducted 4 points because concrete Chinese-content coverage is not demonstrated and WebFetch reachability or target-site constraints for mainland-China users are not guaranteed.
The skill has structured metadata, version 18.0.0, an Apache-2.0 license, quick starts, references, handoff skills, and progressive runtime guidance. Deducted 5 points because maintenance ownership, update process, and changelog responsibility are not clear within the skill; relative references assume the full repository layout and create standalone-install assumptions.
The intended output—evidence-linked CORE-EEAT states, coverage, gaps, remediation plan, and gate verdict—is directly usable when the verified runtime is present. Deducted 9 points because the supplied files contain no real output or execution evidence; missing evidence prevents scoring, and standalone mode prohibits score calculation, leaving substantial user and environment work.
The immutable runtime snapshot, versions, source digest, 80-item catalog, and explicit evidence requirements provide meaningful audit traceability. Deducted 6 points because there is no committed key-path CI test or third-party corroboration for this skill; the supplied repository tests mainly check architecture rather than audit-result correctness.
Open a dimension to read why it scored that way
Evidence confidence：Low — Mostly static review, author material or a limited demo; useful for discovery, not high-risk decisions.
See the full review method →