Use Claude Code for an SEO audit that leads to a tested fix

Start with a question the code can answer

Useful first tasks include finding how canonical URLs are generated, identifying pages without titles, checking whether internal links reach valid routes, or locating the template behind repeated headings. “Make us rank first” is not a testable development task.

Claude Code can inspect files, run commands, and make changes within its available permissions. Anthropic recommends giving it a way to verify the work. See the official best practices. Repository inspection does not reveal private Search Console data unless you separately provide authorized access or an export.

Give the project a small instruction file

Use the project’s CLAUDE.md to preserve consequential conventions: the source content directory, the build command, how generated pages are produced, and what must remain stable. Anthropic documents this file as persistent project guidance. Keep it specific enough to prevent mistakes and short enough to review.

For example: “Articles are generated from content files. Change the source, then regenerate. Preserve existing publication dates, URL paths, analytics consent, and enquiry forms.” Include the actual verification command for your project rather than a command copied from an unrelated tutorial.

Use a read-only starting prompt

Inspect the article templates and the five routes in routes-to-review.txt.
Report each reproducible issue with its file, route, and evidence.
Separate confirmed defects from editorial suggestions.
Propose the smallest fix and how you will verify it.
Do not change files in this first pass.

Claude Code’s documented plan mode supports exploring and proposing changes before edits. The current workflow guide shows claude --permission-mode plan. Check your installed version and permissions. Read the workflow guide.

Turn the finding into a narrow implementation

Illustrative finding: five article pages inherit the blog index canonical because the template defaults to the collection URL. Ask for a patch to the canonical-building function, a generated-page update, and a check that each article points to its own intended URL.

Do not combine that fix with a new navigation, a dependency upgrade, and a rewrite of every article. Small changes make it easier to review the cause, confirm the result, and restore the previous version if necessary. Have the agent show the files it changed and any routes it could not verify.

Review the page people and crawlers receive

Check the generated HTML, not only the template. Confirm the title, canonical, heading structure, internal links, and the next action. Run the relevant project checks, then open a preview at desktop and mobile sizes. After an approved release, inspect the actual live response: a passing local build does not establish that the new version is deployed.

Record the release and follow search performance separately. You can truthfully say “the canonical defect is fixed” when the live response proves it. You cannot infer a ranking gain from that fact. Use the same disciplined workflow for the next issue instead of asking for a broad, unexplained SEO score.