AC
SEO & AEO5.5 KBMIT licensed

claude-seo-content-brief

Rewritten from patterns in AgriciDaniel/claude-seo (MIT)

Generate competitive SEO content briefs with competitor gap scoring, per-section word counts, keyword placement, and meta tags. Handles new-page briefs and improve-existing-page briefs. Use when the user says "content brief", "content outline", "blog brief", "writing brief", or "outline for". Not for site-wide strategy or content calendars (use claude-seo-plan) or comparison pages specifically (use claude-seo-competitor-pages).

  • claude
  • seo
  • content
  • brief

SKILL.md

SEO Content Brief Generator

A brief is only useful if a writer can outrank the current top results by following it. That requires real competitor analysis, a specific angle no ranking page has, and suggestions the target site can actually deliver on.

Workflow

  1. Pick the mode.
  2. Improve mode (existing URL given): fetch the page, mark what is strong (keep it), mark what is thin or missing (fix it). Split the outline into "keep/strengthen" vs "add new". Do not recommend a rewrite when targeted fixes will win.
  3. New page mode (keyword only): use the site's homepage and sitemap for business context, build the outline from scratch around competitive gaps.
  4. Fetch context. Target URL or homepage plus sitemap. You need this for the relevance rule below and for real internal link targets.
  5. Analyze the SERP. Identify the top 5 ranking pages. Filter out non-competitors: Wikipedia, Reddit, Pinterest, Amazon, YouTube, government sites, SEO tool pages, job boards, directories, news aggregators, social platforms. Score each survivor on Depth, Formatting, SEO, and UX (1-10 each). Log three gap types: topic gaps (missing subtopics), depth gaps (covered but shallow), quality gaps (outdated, no expertise, poor formatting). Priority = Impact x Competitive Advantage / Effort.
  6. Classify intent. Informational, commercial, transactional, or navigational. Note the SERP format Google rewards: guide, listicle, comparison table, landing page, FAQ, video, local pack. Match it.
  7. Build the brief. Use the structure in references/brief-template.md. Apply keyword and meta rules from references/keyword-and-meta-rules.md.

Hard rules

  • Website relevance rule. Every heading, keyword, and FAQ must be something this site can credibly deliver based on its actual services. Before each suggestion ask: can this site deliver on this? If no, cut it. Do not copy competitor sections for services the site does not offer.
  • Hub coverage rule. For hub, category, or "types of" pages: the outline must include every relevant category that exists on the site as its own section with an internal link, and must not invent categories that do not exist. For non-hub pages, use site structure for link suggestions only.
  • Information gain, no exceptions. The brief states exactly what new value this page adds that no ranking page provides: proprietary data, real case studies, expert quotes, an original framework. "More detail" and "better formatting" do not count.
  • Clean output language. No researcher names, framework names, or tool names in the deliverable. Those are internal thinking tools. Write for a business owner, not an SEO academic.

Optional live data

If DataForSEO MCP tools are available: serp_google_organic_live_advanced for SERPs, kw_data_google_ads_search_volume for volume, dataforseo_labs_bulk_keyword_difficulty for difficulty, dataforseo_labs_search_intent for intent. If Ahrefs tools are available, use its keyword overview and SERP overview equivalents. No tools: proceed with fetched-page analysis and say the metrics are estimates.

Verification

Do this check on the finished brief: count outline sections, confirm each has a word count, a format note, and a keyword assignment, then sum the per-section word counts. Expect the sum within 10% of the stated target word count and zero sections the site cannot credibly write. If not, rebalance sections or cut irrelevant ones before delivery.

Good vs bad

Good: "H2: 'Steel vs timber framing costs' (secondary keyword in heading, ~250 words, comparison table, FS target). Site offers both services, sitemap confirms." Bad: "H2: 'Our nationwide installation network' because the top competitor has it." The site serves one metro. Violates the relevance rule, the writer cannot deliver it.

Footguns

  • Borrowed outlines. Copying the top competitor's H2 structure produces a me-too page with zero information gain. Fix: build the outline from the gap analysis, not from any single competitor.
  • Keyword stuffing by brief. Assigning the primary keyword to every H2 forces stuffing. Fix: primary keyword in the six mandatory spots (see references/keyword-and-meta-rules.md), secondaries carry the subheadings.
  • Sitemap missing. Proceed, but flag that internal link suggestions are incomplete. Do not invent target URLs.
  • Outline-only requests. When the user asks for "just an outline", skip competitor table, gaps, information gain, and E-E-A-T sections. Deliver the outline block only.

Completion checklist

  • [ ] Mode chosen and stated (improve vs new)
  • [ ] Top 5 real competitors scored, non-competitors filtered
  • [ ] Every outline section passes the relevance rule
  • [ ] Hub coverage rule applied if the page is a hub
  • [ ] Information gain is specific, not "more depth"
  • [ ] Meta tags within length limits from references/keyword-and-meta-rules.md
  • [ ] 3-5 internal links with anchor text pointing at real URLs

Any box unchecked: not done. Fix or say so.

Reference files

More in SEO & AEO

ai-seoOptimize content to be cited by AI search engines and assistants (AI Overviews, ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Cop...claude-seoSEO analysis orchestrator, routes audits to the right specialist skill and merges results into one scored report. Use wh...claude-seo-backlinksBacklink profile analysis: referring domains, anchor text distribution, toxic link detection, competitor link gap. Use w...
All skills