digital-presence

TL;DR — Produces a comprehensive digital presence audit that scores brand visibility, consistency, reputation, and SEO posture across channels, delivering actionable recommendations in a branded HTML report.

---

When to Activate

Invoke this skill when any of these conditions are met:

Signal	Examples
Presence audit request	"Audit our digital presence", "How do we look online?"
Brand consistency check	"Are our social profiles aligned with our brand guidelines?"
Reputation assessment	"What shows up when you Google our company name?"
Pre-launch review	"Before we launch, check our online footprint"
Competitive benchmarking	"How does our online presence compare to competitor X?"

Do not activate for deep SEO technical audits (use seo-architecture), social media content calendars (use content-calendar), or paid advertising analysis.

---

1. Audit Scope Definition

Before conducting the audit, establish boundaries:

• Subject — company name, personal brand, or product name being audited.
• Primary domain — the canonical website URL.
• Social channels in scope — LinkedIn, Twitter/X, Instagram, YouTube, GitHub, TikTok, Facebook, or others relevant to the subject.
• Geographic focus — which markets matter (affects search result interpretation).
• Competitor set — up to three competitors for relative benchmarking (optional).
• Target audience — who should be impressed by the digital presence (investors, customers, talent, partners).

If the user provides only a name and domain, proceed with a standard audit and flag missing channels as findings.

---

2. Audit Dimensions & Scoring Framework

The audit evaluates seven dimensions, each scored 1-10:

2.1 Search Visibility (Weight: 20%)

• First-page Google results for brand name: owned vs third-party vs negative.
• Knowledge panel presence and accuracy.
• Featured snippets or People Also Ask ownership.
• Brand name search volume trend (directional: growing, stable, declining). [INFERRED]

2.2 Social Profile Completeness (Weight: 15%)

• Profile photo, cover image, bio consistency across platforms.
• Contact information accuracy and call-to-action presence.
• Profile URL optimization (vanity URLs vs default strings).
• Verification badges where applicable.

2.3 Content Freshness (Weight: 15%)

• Last post date per channel. Flag channels with 90+ days of inactivity.
• Posting frequency and consistency patterns.
• Content type diversity (text, image, video, documents).

2.4 Brand Consistency (Weight: 15%)

• Visual identity alignment (logo, colors, typography) across channels.
• Messaging consistency (tagline, value proposition, tone of voice).
• Naming consistency (exact brand name vs abbreviations vs misspellings).

2.5 Domain Authority & Technical SEO Snapshot (Weight: 15%)

• Domain age and registration status (WHOIS-based).
• SSL certificate status and configuration.
• Mobile responsiveness signal.
• Page speed category (fast, moderate, slow) based on available signals. [INFERRED]
• Structured data / schema markup presence.

2.6 Reputation Signals (Weight: 10%)

• Review platforms (Google Business, Trustpilot, G2, Glassdoor) — average rating and volume.
• Negative press or complaint signals on first two pages of search results.
• Mentions in authoritative publications or directories.

2.7 Engagement Quality (Weight: 10%)

• Follower-to-engagement ratio on primary social channels.
• Comment sentiment patterns (positive, neutral, negative). [INFERRED]
• Community responsiveness — does the brand reply to comments and messages?

---

3. Report Structure

The output report follows this layout:

1. Executive Summary — overall score (weighted average of 7 dimensions), top 3 strengths, top 3 vulnerabilities, priority actions.
2. Scorecard Table — all 7 dimensions with individual scores, weights, and weighted contribution.
3. Dimension Deep Dives — one section per dimension with findings, evidence, and specific recommendations.
4. Competitive Comparison (if competitors provided) — side-by-side scorecard with gap analysis.
5. Action Plan — prioritized list of recommended improvements, grouped by effort level (quick wins, medium effort, strategic investments).
6. Methodology Note — disclosure of what was assessed, data limitations, and evidence tags.

---

4. Output Formatting

• HTML mode (default for this skill): self-contained HTML with inline CSS. Color-coded scores (green 8-10, amber 5-7, red 1-4). Radar chart approximation using CSS. Section navigation links.
• Markdown mode: available on request, suitable for inclusion in larger documents.
• All scores accompanied by brief justification text.
• Footer: Generated by digital-presence skill | {subject} | {date}.

---

Trade-off Matrix

Dimension	Priority	Rationale
Actionability	HIGH	Scores without recommendations are useless
Evidence quality	HIGH	Every finding must cite observable signals
Completeness	MEDIUM	Cover all 7 dimensions but depth varies by data availability
Visual polish	MEDIUM-HIGH	HTML output represents the brand analysis standard
Speed	LOW	Thoroughness matters more than turnaround

---

Assumptions & Limits

1. The skill operates on information the user provides or describes — it does not autonomously crawl websites or query APIs. [EXPLICIT]
2. Domain authority scores are estimated from contextual signals, not live Moz/Ahrefs data. [INFERRED]
3. Sentiment analysis is directional, not statistically rigorous. [INFERRED]
4. Search visibility assessment is based on user-reported results or general knowledge, not real-time SERP scraping. [EXPLICIT]
5. Competitive benchmarking requires the user to supply competitor profile URLs or basic data. [EXPLICIT]
6. The audit is a point-in-time snapshot; ongoing monitoring requires a separate tool or service. [EXPLICIT]

---

Edge Cases

1. Brand name is a common word — adjust search visibility methodology to focus on branded queries with qualifiers (e.g., "Acme software" not just "Acme"). Note disambiguation challenges in the report.
2. Personal brand vs corporate brand — adapt the template: personal brands emphasize LinkedIn, personal website, and speaking engagements; corporate brands emphasize Google Business, review platforms, and domain authority.
3. No social media presence at all — score social dimensions as 1/10 and frame the entire report as a greenfield digital presence strategy rather than an audit.
4. Negative reputation crisis — if the user reports active negative press, elevate the reputation section to the top of the report and add a crisis response recommendations section.

---

Good vs Bad Example

Good output (excerpt):

## Scorecard

| Dimension | Score | Weight | Weighted |
|-----------|-------|--------|----------|
| Search Visibility | 7/10 | 20% | 1.40 |
| Social Completeness | 4/10 | 15% | 0.60 |
| Content Freshness | 3/10 | 15% | 0.45 |
| Brand Consistency | 6/10 | 15% | 0.90 |
| Domain & SEO | 8/10 | 15% | 1.20 |
| Reputation Signals | 7/10 | 10% | 0.70 |
| Engagement Quality | 5/10 | 10% | 0.50 |
| **Overall** | | | **5.75/10** |

### Top Vulnerability: Content Freshness (3/10)
LinkedIn last posted 127 days ago. Instagram has no posts in 2026.
Twitter/X account exists but has only 3 posts total. [EXPLICIT]

**Recommendation:** Establish a minimum viable posting cadence of
2x/week on LinkedIn and 1x/week on the secondary channel.

Bad output (excerpt):

## Digital Presence
Your online presence is okay. You have some social media accounts
and a website. You could probably post more and update your profiles.
Score: 6/10.

The good example provides per-dimension scores with evidence and specific recommendations. The bad example is vague, lacks structure, and provides an unjustified aggregate score.

---

Validation Gate

Before delivering the audit report, confirm every item:

• Subject identity (brand/person name and primary domain) is clearly stated
• All seven audit dimensions are scored individually with justification
• Weighted overall score is calculated correctly
• Top strengths and top vulnerabilities are explicitly called out
• Each dimension section includes at least one specific, actionable recommendation
• Evidence tags are applied to all claims (EXPLICIT, INFERRED, or OPEN)
• Competitive comparison included if competitor data was provided
• Action plan is prioritized by effort level
• HTML output uses color-coded scores and is self-contained
• Methodology note discloses data limitations transparently
• Output file written to disk at confirmed path

---

Reference Files

File	Purpose
references/audit-template.html	Branded HTML audit report template with scoring layout
references/scoring-rubric.md	Detailed 1-10 scoring criteria for each audit dimension
references/body-of-knowledge.md	Digital presence audit methodologies and industry benchmarks
evals/evals.json	Evaluation scenarios for audit completeness and scoring accuracy