domain-authority-auditor▌
aaron-he-zhu/seo-geo-claude-skills · updated Apr 8, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Comprehensive domain authority audit across 40 standardized criteria with weighted scoring by domain type.
- ›Evaluates domains across 4 dimensions (Citation, Identity, Trust, Eminence) with per-item Pass/Partial/Fail scoring and dimension-specific weights that vary by domain type (Content Publisher, E-commerce, SaaS, etc.)
- ›Detects critical manipulation red flags via 3 veto items (link-traffic coherence, backlink uniqueness, penalty history); caps CITE Score at 39 if any veto triggers
- ›P
Domain Authority Auditor
Based on CITE Domain Rating. Full benchmark reference: references/cite-domain-rating.md
SEO & GEO Skills Library · 20 skills for SEO + GEO · ClawHub · skills.sh System Mode: This cross-cutting skill is part of the protocol layer and follows the shared Skill Contract and State Model.
This skill evaluates domain authority across 40 standardized criteria organized in 4 dimensions. It produces a comprehensive audit report with per-item scoring, dimension and weighted scores by domain type, veto item checks, and a prioritized action plan.
Sister skill: content-quality-auditor evaluates content at the page level (80 items). This skill evaluates the domain behind the content (40 items). Together they provide a complete 120-item assessment.
Namespace note: CITE uses C01-C10 for Citation items; CORE-EEAT uses C01-C10 for Contextual Clarity items. In combined 120-item assessments, prefix with the framework name (e.g., CITE-C01 vs CORE-C01) to avoid confusion.
System role: Citation Trust Gate. It decides whether a domain is credible enough to support ranking, citation, and brand authority work.
When This Must Trigger
Use this when domain credibility or citation trustworthiness is in question — even if the user doesn't use audit terminology:
- User asks "how trustworthy is my site" or "is my domain credible"
- When backlink-analyzer finds toxic link ratio above 15%, its handoff summary recommends this gate check
- Evaluating domain authority before a GEO campaign
- Benchmarking your domain against competitors
- Assessing whether a domain is trustworthy as a citation source
- Running periodic domain health checks or after link building campaigns
- Identifying manipulation red flags (PBNs, link farms, penalty history)
- Cross-referencing with content-quality-auditor for full 120-item assessment
What This Skill Does
- Full 40-Item Audit: Scores every CITE check item as Pass/Partial/Fail
- Dimension Scoring: Calculates scores for all 4 dimensions (0-100 each)
- Weighted Totals: Applies domain-type-specific weights for CITE Score
- Veto Detection: Flags critical manipulation signals (T03, T05, T09)
- Priority Ranking: Identifies Top 5 improvements sorted by impact
- Action Plan: Generates specific, actionable improvement steps
- Cross-Reference: Optionally pairs with CORE-EEAT for combined diagnosis
Quick Start
Start with one of these prompts. Finish with a citation-trust verdict and a handoff summary using the repository format in Skill Contract.
Audit Your Domain
Audit domain authority for [domain]
Run a CITE domain audit on [domain] as a [domain type]
Audit with Domain Type
CITE audit for example.com as an e-commerce site
Score this SaaS domain against the 40-item benchmark: [domain]
Comparative Audit
Compare domain authority: [your domain] vs [competitor 1] vs [competitor 2]
Combined Assessment
Run full 120-item assessment on [domain]: CITE domain audit + CORE-EEAT content audit on [sample pages]
Skill Contract
Gate verdict: TRUSTED (no veto items, scores above threshold) / CAUTIOUS (issues found but no veto) / UNTRUSTED (veto item T03, T05, or T09 failed). Always state the verdict prominently at the top of the report.
Expected output: a CITE audit report, a citation-trust verdict, and a short handoff summary ready for memory/audits/domain/.
- Reads: the target domain, supporting authority signals, comparison domains, and prior decisions from CLAUDE.md and the shared State Model when available.
- Writes: a user-facing authority report plus a reusable summary that can be stored under
memory/audits/domain/. - Promotes: veto items and domain risks to
memory/hot-cache.md(auto-saved). Authority context tomemory/audits/domain/. Results feed into entity-optimizer as authority input for brand's canonical profile. - Next handoff: use the
Next Best Skillbelow once the trust picture is clear.
Data Sources
See CONNECTORS.md for tool category placeholders.
Note: All integrations are optional. This skill works without any API keys — users provide data manually when no tools are connected.
With ~~link database + ~~SEO tool + ~~AI monitor + ~~knowledge graph + ~~brand monitor connected: Automatically pull backlink profiles and link quality metrics from ~~link database, domain authority scores and keyword rankings from ~~SEO tool, AI citation data from ~~AI monitor, entity presence from ~~knowledge graph, and brand mention data from ~~brand monitor.
With manual data only: Ask the user to provide:
- Domain to evaluate
- Domain type (if not auto-detectable): Content Publisher, Product & Service, E-commerce, Community & UGC, Tool & Utility, or Authority & Institutional
- Backlink data: referring domains count, domain authority, top linking domains
- Traffic estimates (from any SEO tool or SimilarWeb)
- Competitor domains for comparison (optional)
Proceed with the full 40-item audit using provided data. Note in the output which items could not be fully evaluated due to missing access (e.g., AI citation data, knowledge graph queries, WHOIS history).
Instructions
When a user requests a domain authority audit:
Step 1: Preparation
### Audit Setup
**Domain**: [domain]
**Domain Type**: [auto-detected or user-specified]
**Dimension Weights**: [from domain-type weight table below]
#### Domain-Type Weight Table
> Canonical source: `references/cite-domain-rating.md`. This inline copy is for convenience.
| Dim | Default | Content Publisher | Product & Service | E-commerce | Community & UGC | Tool & Utility | Authority & Institutional |
|-----|:-------:|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:|
| C | 35% | **40%** | 25% | 20% | 35% | 25% | **45%** |
| I | 20% | 15% | **30%** | 20% | 10% | **30%** | 20% |
| T | 25% | 20% | 25% | **35%** | 25% | 25% | 20% |
| E | 20% | 25% | 20% | 25% | **30%** | 20% | 15% |
#### Veto Check (Emergency Brake)
| Veto Item | Status | Action |
|-----------|--------|--------|
| T03: Link-Traffic Coherence | ✅ Pass / ⚠️ VETO | [If VETO: "Audit backlink profile; disavow toxic links"] |
| T05: Backlink Profile Uniqueness | ✅ Pass / ⚠️ VETO | [If VETO: "Flag as manipulation network; investigate link sources"] |
| T09: Penalty & Deindex History | ✅ Pass / ⚠️ VETO | [If VETO: "Address penalty first; all other optimization is futile"] |
If any veto item triggers, flag it prominently at the top of the report. CITE Score is capped at 39 (Poor) regardless of other scores.
Step 2: C + I Audit (20 items)
Evaluate each item against the criteria in references/cite-domain-rating.md.
Score each item:
- Pass = 10 points (fully meets criteria)
- Partial = 5 points (partially meets criteria)
- Fail = 0 points (does not meet criteria)
### C — Citation
| ID | Check Item | Score | Notes |
|----|-----------|-------|-------|
| C01 | Referring Domains Volume | Pass/Partial/Fail | [specific observation] |
| C02 | Referring Domains Quality | Pass/Partial/Fail | [specific observation] |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
| C10 | Link Source Diversity | Pass/Partial/Fail | [specific observation] |
**C Score**: [X]/100
### I — Identity
| ID | Check Item | Score | Notes |
|----|-----------|-------|-------|
| I01 | Knowledge Graph Presence | Pass/Partial/Fail | [specific observation] |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
**I Score**: [X]/100
Step 3: T + E Audit (20 items)
Same format for Trust and Eminence dimensions.
### T — Trust
| ID | Check Item | Score | Notes |
|----|-----------|-------|-------|
| T01 | Link Profile Naturalness | Pass/Partial/Fail | [specific observation] |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
**T Score**: [X]/100
### E — Eminence
| ID how to use domain-authority-auditorHow to use domain-authority-auditor on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
1Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version) - ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add domain-authority-auditor
2Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
$npx skills add https://github.com/aaron-he-zhu/seo-geo-claude-skills --skill domain-authority-auditorThe skills CLI fetches domain-authority-auditor from GitHub repository aaron-he-zhu/seo-geo-claude-skills and configures it for Cursor.
3Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
◆ Which agents do you want to install to?││ ── Universal (.agents/skills) ── always included ────│ • Amp│ • Antigravity│ • Cline│ • Codex│ ●Cursor(selected)│ • Cursor│ • Windsurf4Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
.cursor/skills/domain-authority-auditorReload or restart Cursor to activate domain-authority-auditor. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /domain-authority-auditor) or your agent's skill management interface.
⚠Security & Verification Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
Additional Resources
List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
GET_STARTED →Use Cases▌
Task Automation & Efficiency
Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort
Example
Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications
✓Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks
Knowledge Enhancement
Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance
Example
Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources
✓Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x
Quality Improvement
Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements
Example
Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors
✓Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort
Implementation Guide▌
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client with skill support
- ›Clear understanding of task or problem to solve
- ›Willingness to iterate and refine outputs
Time Estimate
15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity
Installation Steps
- 1.Install skill using provided installation command
- 2.Test with simple use case relevant to your work
- 3.Evaluate output quality and relevance
- 4.Iterate on prompts to improve results
- 5.Integrate into regular workflow if valuable
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Expecting perfect results without iteration
- ⚠Not providing enough context in prompts
- ⚠Using skill for tasks outside its intended scope
- ⚠Accepting outputs without review and validation
Best Practices▌
✓ Do
- +Start with clear, specific prompts
- +Provide relevant context and constraints
- +Review and refine all outputs before using
- +Iterate to improve output quality
- +Document successful prompt patterns
✗ Don't
- −Don't use without understanding skill limitations
- −Don't skip validation of outputs
- −Don't share sensitive information in prompts
- −Don't expect skill to replace human judgment
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Be specific about desired format and style
- ★Ask for multiple options to choose from
- ★Request explanations to understand reasoning
- ★Combine AI efficiency with human expertise
When to Use This▌
✓ Use When
Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.
✗ Avoid When
Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.
Learning Path▌
- 1Familiarize yourself with skill capabilities and limitations
- 2Start with low-risk, non-critical tasks
- 3Progress to more complex and valuable use cases
- 4Build expertise through regular use and experimentation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
general reviewsRatings
4.6★★★★★29 reviews- ★★★★★Meera Gill· Dec 28, 2024
Registry listing for domain-authority-auditor matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Pratham Ware· Dec 8, 2024
domain-authority-auditor fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Arya Gupta· Dec 4, 2024
Keeps context tight: domain-authority-auditor is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Kofi Wang· Nov 23, 2024
domain-authority-auditor has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Maya Dixit· Nov 19, 2024
Useful defaults in domain-authority-auditor — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Isabella Sethi· Oct 14, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: domain-authority-auditor is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Arjun Liu· Oct 10, 2024
I recommend domain-authority-auditor for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- ★★★★★Sakshi Patil· Sep 13, 2024
domain-authority-auditor is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Meera Ghosh· Sep 5, 2024
Registry listing for domain-authority-auditor matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Maya Torres· Aug 24, 2024
domain-authority-auditor reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
showing 1-10 of 29
1 / 3