What searchers actually want from a Claude SEO skill
Trend-wise, people look for Claude SEO skills that cover technical SEO, content/E-E-A-T, schema, and newer AI-search angles (GEO / AI Overviews) — not another keyword stuffing checklist from 2014.
The winning suites orchestrate specialists (technical, content, schema, performance) instead of one mega-prompt that forgets half the categories.
Comparison axes that cut through marketing
Coverage map — Which categories are real modules vs empty folder names?
Parallelism — Can it delegate, or does everything run serially and time out on big sites?
Source hygiene — Does it reference current Google guidance (INP, AI optimization) or recycled blog lore?
Extensibility — Optional DataForSEO / Firecrawl / Search Console hooks are nice; they should be optional, not required to get a basic audit.
Report quality — Can a human client act on the output without you rewriting it?
A fair test protocol
Pick one real URL you own. Run two SEO skills with the same brief: “technical + on-page + top five fixes.” Compare specificity, false positives, and whether recommendations conflict.
Then break something small (drop a canonical, block a path in robots) and see which skill notices. Skills that miss planted defects are not “comprehensive” — they are theatrical.
Where site measurement still matters
Claude skills reason over what they can fetch and what you paste in. Scheduled lab + field measurements (Core Web Vitals, screenshots, competitor scores) still belong in a monitoring product — which is why AuditHQ exists alongside your Claude workflow, not instead of it.