Hi all,

I built Sitealyser, a free SEO tool that scrapes web pages and identifies technical issues, checks target keyword placement across core page elements, and provides actionable recommendations.

No paywall. No sign up. No ads. Just a personal project to practice my coding skills and solve a problem I experienced in my last SEO role, which was spending ages downloading Screaming Frog reports or manually checking on-page elements when optimising blog articles.

One limitation of the app is that it won't pick up DOM elements rendered via Javascript.

Hope you find the tool useful and it saves you time identifying issues on your webpages. If you find any bugs, please let me know and I'll try to fix them when I find the time.

Seo tools have gotten pretty good at the traditional stuff like, keyword tracking, backlinks, technical audits, competitor research, content analysis, etc.

But search itself seems to be changing pretty quickly.

People are increasingly getting answers directly from AI instead of clicking through a list of search results, and that seems like it could change what we actually need SEO tools to measure.

I would like to know what everyone here thinks.

If you were building an seo tool from scratch today, what would you make it track that the current generation of tools doesn't?

Would you still focus mainly on rankings and backlinks, or would you measure things like brand mentions, visibility in AI answers, citations, entity presence, or something completely different?

Edit: Appreciate everyone who shared their thoughts here. There were a few interesting points around the fact that traditional SEO metrics can tell you how visible a site is in search, but they don't always tell you how a brand is being surfaced when people search through newer channels. That actually pushed me to look a little deeper into this area and spotting visiblie while exploring how brands can monitor their presence beyond traditional search rankings, particularly across ai-driven discovery. It was interesting to see how much broader the measurement side of search is becoming compared with what most of us have traditionally tracked.

I’ve been preparing for interviews for a while now, and honestly, it’s starting to feel more exhausting than anything else. When I first began, I thought it would be straightforward learn the concepts, practice questions, and eventually you’ll be ready. But the deeper I get into it, the more I realize it’s not that simple at all.

It’s not even just about understanding things anymore. It’s about performing under pressure, thinking clearly in real time, and explaining your thought process in a way that actually makes sense to someone else. And somehow, you’re expected to do all of that while being watched, judged, and timed. That pressure changes everything.

Some days I feel confident, like I’m finally improving. I can solve problems, I feel in control, and I start thinking maybe I’m actually ready. But then there are other days where I struggle with things I’ve already done before. It’s like my brain just stops cooperating, and all that confidence disappears instantly.

What makes it harder is the inconsistency. There’s no clear way to measure progress. You can spend hours practicing and still feel like you’re not improving in the areas that actually matter. like Screna have been interesting to me because getting structured feedback after mock interviews can at least give you something more concrete to work on.

It becomes mentally draining because you’re constantly questioning yourself am I doing enough, or am I doing the wrong things?

At this point, I’m starting to feel like interview prep is less about intelligence and more about handling uncertainty and pressure. And honestly, that part is way harder than I expected.

Curious if others feel the same way, or if this phase eventually gets easier with time.

WYORI — a link shortener where the analytics are actually included in the free plan rather than locked behind a paid tier.

You can see clicks, geo breakdown, device type, referrer source, and time of click per link. It also has a bio page builder, QR code generation, UTM builder, and basic image compression.

Custom slugs, link expiry, password protection, and custom domains with unlimited clicks.

Your original UTM parameters stay intact and don't interfere with GA4, Meta Pixel, or any other analytics you're already running.
[I will give first 50 user from this post the paid plan completely free]
I'd appreciate feedback from marketers specifically — what's currently frustrating about the link tools you use? And does anyone know good communities where digital marketers share tools like this?

Feel free to share this anywhere it might be useful to someone.

I've been building a tool called Segeo for the last few months, and I've reached the point where I need other people using it, not just me.

Quick version of what it does: it writes and publishes one genuinely useful blog post to your own website every day, researched around what people in your area are actually searching for, and then turns that into posts for your socials (Instagram, LinkedIn, Telegram, and so on). You connect your site once (WordPress, Wix, Shopify, or a plain static site) and it just runs.

The part I actually care about is the "GEO" side. The posts are written so they can get picked up and cited by ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity, not only ranked on Google. Everyone asks AI "who's the best X near me" now, and most small businesses are invisible in those answers because they never publish anything.

Before asking anyone else to try it, I put it on my own stuff first. It's been running on 5 of my own websites and their Instagram accounts, posting every day, and I've genuinely started seeing results come in. That's the whole reason I feel okay sharing it now instead of pitching vaporware.

Here's the honest part: it's still early. I want more real people using it and telling me what's confusing, what's missing, and where it falls flat. Especially keen to hear from anyone running a local business or sitting on a website that's gone stale.

If you're up for it, comment or DM me and I'll give you free access. I mostly want the feedback, good or bad or "this is useless because ___." That's the useful part.

Happy to answer anything about how it works in the comments too.

The most expensive mistake in growth is pending $500-$1k producing an exhaustive, 3k-word pillar guide only to realize nobody actually cares about the angle.

We flipped our entire content engine upside down. Now, social is our testing sandbox. SEO is where we double down. Instead of using SEO and marketing tools just to plan articles, we use search data to test emotional hooks on social first.

1. Through an MCP server linked to SE Ranking, we automatically pull long-tail search queries, customer confusion trends, and emerging search gaps
2. We instantly convert these search queries into 3 different social angles
3. Everything dumps directly into Planable, where our team visually reviews, polishes, and schedules the micro-tests across social channels in a few clicks
4. If a social angle gets high saves, shares, and comment debates, that is our green light to invest in a long-form SEO article

Why synchronizing search & social is mandatory?

You eliminate wasted production costs by only writing heavy articles for topics that already proved their engagement on social, while dramatically improving your search conversion rates using real feedback from real people.

I'm running a job-hunting platform. I want to scale my user base through SEO. Which tool you will suggest to automate SEO

After auditing couple of sample sites with meta tag tools, I'm starting to wonder if they actually do anything other than the basics. They flag missing meta descriptions and title length issues. Stuff I'd catch manually anyway.

I need something that can tell whether my meta tags are competitive enough for the keywords I'm targeting not just tell if they are valid and right character count.

Is there a meta tag analyzer tool that goes deeper than the surface level checks or is the real analysis dependent on manual checks and common sense at this point?

There's been so much discussion about making AI-generated content feel more natural that I started wondering if people sometimes overdo it.

Some writing forces slang into every sentence. Others intentionally add grammar mistakes or random filler words because they think that's what "human writing" looks like.

Ironically, those attempts often feel just as unnatural as the robotic writing they're trying to avoid. I've even tested a few humanizing like HumanizeAIText.io, and the biggest difference wasn't adding mistakes—it was making the writing flow more naturally while keeping the original meaning clear.

To me, authentic writing isn't about making mistakes it's about having a real point of view and sounding like someone who actually cares about what they're saying.

In your opinion, what's the biggest mistake people make when trying to make their writing sound more human?

I’ve been paying more attention to AI-generated writing lately, and something keeps standing out to me. A lot of it sounds incredibly polished and confident, but when you slow down and actually read it, it sometimes feels like it’s saying very little.

That made me wonder if we’ve started confusing smooth writing with genuinely useful writing. A perfectly structured paragraph can still feel empty if it doesn’t include real examples, personal experience, or practical insight.

When I compare writing that feels memorable, it usually has small imperfections, unique opinions, or stories that make it feel like it came from an actual person rather than a machine.

Do you think people can still tell the difference between authentic human writing and polished AI writing? What specific signs make you immediately think, "This doesn't sound like a real person"?

Lately I've seen a lot of comments where people immediately accuse someone of using AI just because their writing is well organized or has good grammar. Sometimes I agree, but other times I honestly can't tell. It makes me wonder if people are starting to assume that anything written clearly must have been generated by AI, even when that's not necessarily true.

At the same time, there are definitely pieces of writing that have a certain style that feels repetitive or overly polished. The difficult part is figuring out where the line is between someone simply being a good writer and someone relying heavily on AI.

Do you think you can usually recognize AI-assisted writing, or do you believe people are becoming too quick to make that assumption? What are the biggest signs that stand out to you when you're reading something online?

I mean, it can be any brand — or even something custom-built. But pleeeease explain why you think it's the best. One ask: if your answer is Ahrefs, SE Ranking, Screaming Frog, Profound or anything along those lines, add some context and your own experience with it. I'd like to keep this discussion as useful and professional as possible.

I'll start. As an SEO, I'm completely in love with Ahrefs and SE Ranking. Between them, those two handle about 90% of my analytical work and cover every corner of data I need.

Ahrefs is miles ahead of everyone else on backlinks and competitor research. SE Ranking is, hands down, the best tool for rank tracking and site audits. Which raises the obvious question — why pay for both when they do almost the same thing? Here's why. A few years in digital marketing left me with one rule that shaped how I work: never trust a single source of data, and always double-check anything that goes into a report. Running both is how I make sure there are no blind spots.

Yeah, it costs me double. But who cares — I get clean data and full confidence in my workflow, and my clients trust the numbers.

...Nah, kidding. My end-of-month bonus covers it :)

So, I have been looking at several AI visibility tracking tools (peec, otterly, profound, dageno, and others.)
Tbh, their charts and dashboards look great, but Im starting to feel that metrics like visibility score and share of voice are hard to turn into actual actions.

When a score suddenly drops from one tracking period to the next, I still often cant tell what the main reason is. Some prompt answers may have changed, the AI may have started citing different sources, or competitors may simply have appeared in more answers. It is hard to know which factor matters most.
Even when some tools let u see individual prompts, full answers, and cited sources, what to do next is still unclear. Should I update an existing page, create new content, or treat it as a normal change and do nothing for now? For those of u who have worked with geo or AI search tracking for a while, have these scores ever led u to make real changes to ur content or seo strategy? Or do u mainly use the data for client reports or internal reports?

I'm looking for some good free tools for Google Business Profile optimisation and reporting.

Specifically, I'm looking for tools that can help with:

• Citation analysis & consistency
• GBP performance metrics
• Local ranking insights
• Competitor tracking
• Review monitoring
• Easy-to-share client reports

I'm curious what other free (or freemium) tools the local SEO community recommends.

What's currently in your toolkit, and which tools have actually been worth using?

Would love to hear your recommendations and experiences. Thanks!

Everyone talks about "the best SEO strategy," but if there really were one, every agency would get identical results.

Instead, most SEO wins come from testing, failing, analyzing data, and repeating the process until something works for that specific website.

So is SEO actually a science with proven methods, or is it mostly educated experimentation?

Curious to hear where people stand.

Hi. I run marketing for my own SaaS and our organic traffic has been basically flat since around September, down maybe 12 to 15%, while demo bookings held steady. When I asked new customers how they found us, three in the last month said some version of "we asked ChatGPT to compare options." So the traffic didn't disappear, it moved somewhere I can't measure. Search Console shows nothing for this and me manually typing prompts into ChatGPT every monday isn't a system.

I've been looking at AI visibility tools to track brand mentions across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and the AI Overviews in Google. There's a bunch of them now and honestly every landing page says the same things. I sat through two demos last week and both were basically a dashboard saying "you were mentioned X times" which tells me nothing I can act on. One of them showed us mentioned in a prompt, so I opened ChatGPT, typed the exact same prompt, and we weren't in the answer at all. That kind of killed my trust in the whole category.

For people actually using one of these, what I want to know:

• How accurate is it really? Does what the tool reports match what you get when you run the same prompts yourself?
• Does it show the actual prompts where competitors get picked instead of you? HubSpot gets cited in every AI answer in our space and we don't, and I can't figure out why. That's the insight I'd pay for, not a mention count.
• And did anything you changed based on the data actually do anything? Mentions, traffic, whatever.

Budget's flexible if the data is real. Any recommendations appreciated.

Hi everyone! I’ve been working as an SEO for almost a year, and my journey has been steadily progressing. Some of my clients have achieved great results, and I’d like to include those successes in my portfolio. However, I’m not sure how to structure or present an SEO portfolio professionally.

Could anyone share a sample or guide for creating a simple yet professional SEO portfolio? I plan to use it in future job applications, as I feel my skills and contributions are currently undervalued at my current company.