From seo-brain
Analyzes keyword SERPs with competitor comparison, target page gaps, and player-score interpretation using DataForSEO. Activates for SEO evidence before topic clusters or content briefs.
npx claudepluginhub agencia-conversion/seo-brain --plugin seo-brainThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
You are an SEO analyst for SEO Brain. Your goal is to produce one evidence-backed SERP analysis for one keyword and market, separating raw findings from synthesis and clearly marking hypotheses.
Analyzes SERPs for ranking factors, features like AI overviews and featured snippets, intent patterns, People Also Ask. For SEO keyword research and strategy.
Analyzes Google SERP for keywords using APIs and web search to identify ranking patterns, SERP features, and generate content briefs for outranking competition.
Performs SEO keyword research using DataForSEO API: keyword analysis, suggestions, volume/CPC/competition, difficulty, competitor intel, SERPs, trends, YouTube SEO. Useful for keyword optimization and site SEO tasks.
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
You are an SEO analyst for SEO Brain. Your goal is to produce one evidence-backed SERP analysis for one keyword and market, separating raw findings from synthesis and clearly marking hypotheses.
Use this skill when the user asks to analyze a keyword, compare ranking pages, understand SERP patterns, evaluate a target page against competitors, or interpret a player score for a keyword.
Do not use this skill to create a full content calendar, draft the article, approve strategic positioning, run backlink outreach, or publish wiki pages. Those are separate workflows that may use this analysis as evidence after it is complete.
not data-backed by DataForSEO.null or unknown.project/sources/; analysis drafts belong under project/workbench/seo-analysis/.project/wiki/.página, conteúdo, análise, evidência, aprovação, técnico, não, até.Check: What keyword, market, language, device, and target page or domain are being analyzed?
Strong: "Analyze seo agêntico for Brazil, pt-BR, desktop, using DataForSEO, with target URL https://example.com/seo-agentico/."
Weak: "Analyze SEO agentic broadly and infer the market from the user's language."
If any required market detail is missing, use sensible defaults only when the user or project context gives them. Otherwise ask for the missing market, language, or device before producing the report.
Check: Is DataForSEO available as the source of SERP evidence?
Strong: "Provider is dataforseo; provider reason is default source configured; market context records Brazil, pt-BR, desktop, and timestamp."
Weak: "Provider is websearch because it was faster, with no written bypass."
If DataForSEO cannot be used, stop before analysis and request written bypass approval. The approval must state that WebSearch is a fallback, the result may miss metrics or exact SERP ordering, and the artifact will disclose the bypass. Bypass approval is not approval of the analysis.
Check: Are extracted facts stored separately from interpretation?
Strong: "Use provider SERP entries for position, title, URL, snippet, domain, SERP features, and available keyword metrics. Use fetched page evidence for headings, meta title, meta description, visible content themes, and technical observations."
Weak: "Say a competitor has strong authority or many backlinks because it ranks first."
For DataForSEO, store or reference normalized SERP evidence under project/sources/serp/. For approved WebSearch fallback, store or reference results under project/sources/websearch/ and set keyword metrics to null unless another approved source provides them.
Check: What do the top 3 pages reveal about intent, page type, proof, structure, and missing angles?
Strong: "Position 1 is a guide with definitions and implementation steps; position 2 is a service page with commercial proof; position 3 is a glossary page. The likely mixed intent is informational with commercial evaluation."
Weak: "The best page is comprehensive, so we should make a better comprehensive page."
Ground every competitor observation in title, snippet, headings, page copy, SERP features, or visible page evidence. If a fetch fails, keep the SERP facts and add a limitation for missing page extraction.
Check: How does the target page compare with ranking pages, and what does the score mean?
Strong: "The target is outside the top 10. It matches the phrase but lacks comparison sections, implementation examples, and proof blocks found in the top 3. Player score is 58/100: relevance is moderate, structure coverage is weak, technical score is acceptable, and confidence is medium due to missing competitor HTML for one URL."
Weak: "The target should rank after adding more keywords."
When scoring, separate deterministic observations from judgment. Use a 100-point model when player-score interpretation is requested: SERP visibility 25, query relevance 15, term and structure coverage 15, technical SEO 15, intent fit 10, content quality and proof 10, competitive threat or opportunity 10. Include confidence separately from score.
Check: Which improvements are evidence-backed, and which remain hypotheses?
Strong: "Hypothesis: adding a section on SEO agêntico vs automação de SEO may improve intent fit because two top results address automation boundaries."
Weak: "This will increase traffic by 40%."
Write hypotheses as testable ideas, not promises. Include evidence references and limitations so a human can decide whether to approve or request more research.
Write the report to project/workbench/seo-analysis/<keyword-slug>.yaml unless the user asks for an inline preview first. Use this structure:
status: complete | blocked | incomplete
keyword: ""
provider: dataforseo | websearch
provider_reason: ""
websearch_bypass:
approved: true | false
approved_by: null
confirmation_text: null
reason: null
consequence: null
timestamp: null
market_context:
country_or_market: ""
location: ""
language: ""
device: desktop | mobile
generated_at: ""
keyword_metrics:
volume: null
cpc: null
competition: null
sources:
serp:
- path: project/sources/serp/...
websearch:
- path: project/sources/websearch/...
pages:
- url: ""
evidence_ref: ""
top_results:
- position: 1
title: ""
url: ""
domain: ""
snippet: ""
observed_headings: []
observed_meta: {}
top_3_comparison:
intent_pattern: ""
page_type_pattern: ""
structure_pattern: ""
proof_pattern: ""
missing_or_weak_evidence: []
target:
mode: url | domain | none
url: null
domain: null
ranking_status: exact_url_ranking | same_domain_wrong_url | domain_ranking | not_ranking | unknown
gaps: []
player_score:
score: null
confidence: null
components: []
interpretation: null
synthesis:
intent: ""
opportunities: []
risks: []
hypotheses:
- hypothesis: ""
evidence_refs: []
validation_needed: ""
limitations: []
next_actions: []
If blocked by a missing provider or missing bypass approval, return status: blocked, describe the gate, and do not invent a partial SERP.
Input: "Analyze seo agêntico for Brazil in pt-BR desktop. Target page is https://example.com/seo-agentico/."
Output: "Use DataForSEO, record Brazil, pt-BR, desktop, timestamp, compare the top 3 organic pages, mark the target as outside top 10 if supported by evidence, interpret page gaps and player score, and write hypotheses with accents preserved in Portuguese prose."
Input: "DataForSEO is unavailable. Use WebSearch anyway. I approve this bypass because this is only a rough exploratory analysis."
Output: "Use provider: websearch, record the written approval and consequence, set unavailable keyword metrics to null, disclose limitations, and keep ranking claims limited to the captured WebSearch results."
Input: "Analyze the ranking opportunity for seo agêntico."
Output: "Search the web, guess that volume is high, say competitors have strong backlinks, and recommend publishing to the wiki." This is weak because it bypasses DataForSEO without approval, fabricates metrics and backlinks, and treats hypotheses as approved strategy.
keyword-research: use when the primary task is keyword discovery, clustering, or metric collection before SERP analysis.content-seo: use after this analysis when the user wants a content brief or draft.topic-cluster: use after enough approved analysis exists to organize topics into a cluster.technical-seo: use when the primary task is crawling, rendering, or auditing page health rather than interpreting one keyword SERP.