Run a useful, prioritised technical SEO audit
A technical SEO audit is not a tool export. It connects evidence about discovery, indexing and rendering with important pages, search needs and measurable outcomes. The deliverable should help a team decide what to change and how to validate it.
What to remember.
- Begin with priority pages and search tasks.
- Compare several discovery and indexing sources.
- Rank findings by impact, extent, effort and validation method.
Define priority pages and intent
List the pages that explain an offer, answer a decisive question or support an action. Give each page a primary purpose and expected outcome. This prevents a low-value URL from receiving the same attention as a core journey.
Compare discovery sources
Review navigation, internal links, XML sitemaps, search data, analytics and server logs when available. Differences between the sources often reveal orphan pages, obsolete URLs or blocked resources.
Check indexability and canonical signals
Verify status codes, robots directives, canonicals, redirects and hreflang. Confirm that the preferred URL is internally linked and included in the sitemap, and that duplicate variants do not send conflicting signals.
Inspect rendered content and media
Make sure essential text, links and images are available in standard HTML and do not depend on a fragile interaction. Check titles, descriptions, headings, alt text and the representative image near the relevant content.
Review performance and accessibility
Use field and laboratory data to investigate LCP, INP and CLS, but connect each issue to a real template and user task. Keyboard access, readable forms and stable layouts improve quality beyond search visibility.
Turn findings into decisions
For every issue, record evidence, affected URLs, likely consequence, effort, owner and validation method. Fix patterns in templates before isolated symptoms and retest after deployment.
Check the reference material.
Related guides
Put the method into practice
An illustrative application case
An audit finds conflicting canonical URLs. Group affected pages by template and confirm chosen destinations before applying a global correction. Then check internal links, language alternatives and sitemap. An incorrect shared rule can spread the issue across all pages.
Prepare a domain and URL migration
Use this worksheet in a review with the person responsible for delivery. Keep the evidence alongside the decision, rather than marking a task complete on trust alone.
| Action | Evidence |
|---|---|
| Compare published pages, sitemap, HTML links and available indexing data. | A list of priority URLs with HTTP status, canonical and indexability. |
| Check language variants and links to priority content. | Reciprocal language mappings and no important orphan pages. |
| Prioritise by user impact and verify each fix. | For each issue: reproducible example, cause, owner and expected outcome. |
Download the worksheet to fill in (CSV)
A question to resolve before acting
Does a sitemap guarantee indexing?
No. It helps discovery, but server responses, crawler access, indexing instructions and content usefulness still matter. Check priority pages individually rather than relying on the number of submitted URLs.
Resources for this project
Web service provider
Française du Numérique
If the audit leads to SEO work or a redesign, compare proposed actions, validation evidence and planned maintenance; request a priority for each correction.
Sites from the AR ecosystem, selected for their relevance to this topic. Check scope, terms and current offers with each publisher. Our selection method.