Plan, build, and review one evidence-backed SEO content wave for the Minutes site, including SERP research, page inventory, design-system compliance, internal linking, generated LLM text, and a shipped-wave retro. Use when the user asks for an SEO wave, a group of comparison or use-case pages, a docs or resource hub expansion, or a coordinated batch of search landing pages.
Instalação
Instalar com Codex ou Claude Copie este prompt, cole no Codex, Claude ou outro assistente e deixe que ele revise a página da skill e instale para você.
Plan, build, and review one evidence-backed SEO content wave for the Minutes site, including SERP research, page inventory, design-system compliance, internal linking, generated LLM text, and a shipped-wave retro. Use when the user asks for an SEO wave, a group of comparison or use-case pages, a docs or resource hub expansion, or a coordinated batch of search landing pages.
triggers
["create an seo wave","build an seo wave","plan an seo wave","ship an seo wave","seo content wave","comparison page wave","use case page wave","docs hub wave"]
user_invocable
true
metadata
{"display_name":"Minutes SEO Wave","short_description":"Ship a researched, internally linked SEO page wave without duplicating or overstating claims.","default_prompt":"Build one evidence-backed SEO content wave for Minutes and return the page checklist plus shipped-wave retro.","site_category":"Artifacts","site_example":"/minutes-seo-wave comparison pages","site_best_for":"Coordinate a researched batch of search pages, site integrations, and validation.","site_visible":false}
Produce one coherent SEO content wave, not a pile of disconnected pages. Keep the method reusable across comparison pages, use-case or resource pages, and docs hubs.
Competitive research and keyword specifics are time-sensitive. Research them fresh for each wave. Internal competitive plans may exist in gitignored documentation; never invent, reconstruct, or embed those private specifics in this skill or in repository documentation.
Inputs
Collect:
the wave theme, such as comparison pages, use-case pages, a resource cluster, or a docs hub
target keywords and search intents
the intended audience and conversion action
the requested number of pages or the time box
existing pages and drafts that must not be duplicated
any supplied first-party research, approved claims, and source requirements
If theme or keywords are missing, inspect the repository and ask only for the choice that materially changes the wave. Do not invent search volume, keyword difficulty, competitor capabilities, pricing, compliance status, or product claims.
Steps
1. Inventory the existing site
Map the current routes before proposing slugs or outlines:
Inspect relevant hubs, shared page components, adjacent pages, metadata, structured data, and markdown twins. Record pages that already satisfy the target intent, pages that should be refreshed instead of duplicated, and genuine content gaps.
2. Perform SERP recon
Research each target query with current search results. Identify:
dominant intent: comparison, informational, transactional, navigational, or mixed
recurring page formats and questions
weak, stale, or unsupported answers the wave can improve
primary sources required to support factual claims
a distinct, truthful angle Minutes can substantiate
For competitor, legal, compliance, security, pricing, or product-capability claims, use current primary or official sources and record the review date. Treat search snippets and third-party summaries as discovery aids, not final evidence. For claims about Minutes, verify the current repository implementation and documentation.
Do not copy competitor framing or manufacture a claim because it would make a stronger headline. Give alternatives credit where they are better. Add appropriate not-legal-advice or scope language to regulated-topic pages.
3. Outline the wave page by page
For every proposed page, specify:
route and primary keyword
search intent and direct answer
unique promise and evidence plan
title, description, and social metadata
section outline, including honest limitations or "when the alternative wins" where relevant
structured data only when the visible page content supports it
internal links in and out
conversion action
required hub, sitemap, and markdown-twin updates
Use extractable structures when they serve the query: a direct answer near the top, clear headings, comparison tables, concise lists, and visible FAQs that match any FAQ schema. Avoid near-duplicate pages that merely swap a product name or keyword.
4. Implement within DESIGN.md
Read DESIGN.md and reuse established site components and nearby page patterns. Preserve the Minutes type system: Instrument Serif for display headings, Geist for body and UI, and Geist Mono for labels, evidence, and technical material.
Use the repository's semantic design tokens and established utilities, including var(--bg), var(--text), var(--accent), font-serif, font-sans, and font-mono. Do not introduce raw color values, ad hoc font families, off-scale spacing, gradients, glows, decorative motion, or new arbitrary literals. The design-token CI gate treats new raw literals as failures.
Keep the page useful without JavaScript when practical, keyboard accessible, responsive, and consistent in light and dark modes. Metadata and structured data must describe what the rendered page actually says.
5. Run an evidence and honesty pass
Fact-check every time-sensitive or consequential statement against its recorded source. Then compare Minutes claims against code and first-party documentation. Look especially for absolute language such as "never," "always," "nothing leaves," "compliant," "offline," or "free forever" that may need a precise boundary.
Check dates, plan names, pricing cadence, beta status, platform availability, default versus opt-in behavior, storage and network paths, and legal or compliance qualifiers. Remove a claim when it cannot be verified.
6. Complete the internal-linking pass
Connect the wave as a cluster:
link each page to its relevant hub, pillar, sibling pages, and product or quick-start action
add the new pages to the appropriate compare, resource, writing, or docs hub
add contextual links from existing authoritative pages when useful
update site/app/sitemap.ts
add or update the corresponding site/public/**/*.md page when the site pattern requires a markdown twin
verify there are no orphan pages or circular trails with no useful destination
Use descriptive anchor text. Do not stuff exact-match keywords into every link.
7. Regenerate and validate generated surfaces
After page and inventory changes, regenerate the LLM-facing site text:
Run the relevant site tests, type checks, and repository gates for the touched files. At minimum, run the design-token check when site UI changed:
node scripts/check_design_tokens.mjs
Do not hand-edit generated llms.txt files. Fix their source or generator input and regenerate.
Output format
Return a page checklist followed by the shipped-wave retro. Keep routes, keywords, evidence, integrations, and validation visible:
## Wave: <theme>### Page checklist- [ ] `/route-one` | `<primary keyword>` | <intent> - Direct answer and distinct angle: <oneline> - Evidence: <primarysourcesorfirst-partyrepositoryevidence> - Integrations: <hub, sibling, sitemap, markdown twin, CTA>- [ ] `/route-two` | `<primary keyword>` | <intent> - Direct answer and distinct angle: <oneline> - Evidence: <primarysourcesorfirst-partyrepositoryevidence> - Integrations: <hub, sibling, sitemap, markdown twin, CTA>### Wave checklist- [ ] Existing `site/app/` and `site/public/` inventory checked for overlap.
- [ ] SERP intent and primary evidence recorded with a review date.
- [ ] `DESIGN.md`, accessibility, metadata, and structured-data constraints met.
- [ ] Hub, sibling, pillar, conversion, sitemap, and markdown-twin links complete.
- [ ] LLM text regenerated and repository checks pass.
## Shipped-wave retro-**Scope shipped:**<routesandpagetypes>-**Why this wave:**<sharedintentandevidence-backedopportunity>-**Evidence and honesty review:**<sourceschecked, claimscorrectedordropped, reviewdate>-**Site integration:**<hubs, internal links, sitemap, markdown twins, generated LLM text>-**Validation:**<commandsandresults>-**Follow-up:**<measurementorunresolvedwork, withoutinventingrankingsortraffic>
Mark items complete only when the repository contains the work and the validation ran. The retro should follow the #435 through #438 pattern: summarize the shipped routes, the research basis, the integration work, the adversarial or honesty review, and concrete corrections. Do not claim ranking, traffic, or conversion impact before measurement exists.
Checklist
Before calling the wave complete, verify:
The theme, keywords, audience, conversion action, and wave size are explicit.
Existing site/app/ routes, hubs, sitemap entries, and markdown twins were inventoried.
Each page answers a distinct search intent and avoids thin keyword substitution.
Current primary sources support competitor and high-stakes claims.
Minutes claims match current code and first-party documentation.
DESIGN.md tokens and fonts are reused with no new raw design literals.
Metadata, structured data, accessibility, responsive behavior, and light and dark modes were checked.
Internal links connect every page to a hub, relevant siblings, a pillar, and a useful conversion action.
site/app/sitemap.ts and required site/public/**/*.md twins are updated.
node scripts/generate_llms_txt.mjs --check passes after regeneration.
Relevant site checks and node scripts/check_design_tokens.mjs pass.
The shipped-wave retro records scope, evidence, integrations, corrections, validation, and follow-up without invented outcomes.
