SEO audit prompt for website owners
Use this SEO audit prompt to organise a review, then supply observed page evidence rather than asking an AI assistant to invent a crawl. The prompt keeps recommendations separate from facts and sends live checks to a purpose-built audit.
Updated 7 October 2026. Use the prompt with evidence you have actually checked.
Copyable prompt
Act as a technical SEO reviewer. Using only the URL list and observations I provide, produce a table with: URL, observed signal, likely impact, recommended check, evidence still needed, and owner. Do not claim a ranking effect, indexing status, backlink quality, Core Web Vitals result, AI citation, or server behavior unless the supplied evidence proves it. Mark unknowns as unknown. Group repeated template issues, then give the smallest verification step for each fix.How to use it
Give the prompt evidence
Paste a small list of URLs, the returned status, title, description, heading, canonical, robots directives, language and viewport. Add the sitemap and robots observations separately. If a value was not checked, leave it blank instead of asking the assistant to guess.
Ask for a fix owner
A website owner may own content and access policy, while a developer owns templates and deployment. Adding an owner column turns a polished answer into a workable list. Keep the person responsible for verifying the change in the same row.
Verify with a live audit
The linked Website Audit can inspect up to ten public pages and show observed values behind its findings. Use the prompt to organise the result, then fetch the same URL again after the fix.
Do not feed private data casually
A prompt can contain URLs and technical observations without containing customer records. Remove credentials, private query strings, personal data and unpublished information before sending material to an external AI service.
Questions
Can the prompt crawl my site?
No. It can reason over evidence you provide. Use a live audit for the public HTML check.
Does the prompt produce a ranking score?
It should not. A score without a defined evidence base is not a reliable audit result.