Sample · illustrative only
Content architecture sample
Example output after a capped multi-page crawl: taxonomy coverage, dedicated vs weak vs missing topics, and recommended pages to create.
brightline.example.com
Crawl 22 pages · 148 sitemap URLs · growth taxonomy
Architecture score
Grade DDedicated service + blog pages found. Comparison, proof, and pricing still missing after crawl.
Coverage by group
Dedicated vs weak vs missing
- Services / productsDedicated
- Blog / resourcesDedicated
- About / companyDedicated
- Contact / demoWeak
- Use cases / industriesWeak
- Comparison / alternativesMissing
- Proof (case studies)Missing
- Pricing / plansMissing
Recommended pages
Highest-leverage URLs to create
- /case-studies/Customer results hub
- /pricing/Plans & packaging
- /compare/Vs alternatives
- /use-cases/ICP / industry pages
Top opportunities
Prioritized next actions
- 01
Ship a proof hub
No case-study or customers path in crawl or sitemap seeds — buyers and answer engines lack attributable results.
→ Publish /case-studies/ with 2–3 real outcomes and link it from primary nav
- 02
Clarify commercial packaging
Pricing/plans URLs were not found in the crawl budget.
→ Add /pricing/ or a clear “get a quote” page linked from the homepage CTA
- 03
Add comparison coverage
No /vs or /compare routes detected among crawled or sitemap-prioritized URLs.
→ Create one fair comparison page for the most common alternative
Limitations
- Crawl is capped (~36 HTML pages) — not a full site mirror.
- Not keyword-volume or Search Console data.
- Missing in crawl ≠ guaranteed absence deeper in the site.
- Scores architecture presence, not content quality depth.
Illustrative sample · not a real website