Login
Users sign in through the protected login page. API and dashboard routes are guarded until a valid session exists.
Structured E-E-A-T audits for webpages
E-E-A-T Content Scoring Tool
Score a webpage against a 47-question E-E-A-T rubric and turn the review into a saved, structured report.
Built for content, SEO, editorial, and quality-review teams, this tool logs users in, tags audits by brand, analyzes a rendered URL, and stores recent runs with an overall score, applicable-question count, and detailed question-by-question explanations.
47-question rubric
Brand filtering
Saved run history
Role-based access
EEAT Scoring Dashboard
Brand: Example Brand
https://www.example-brand.com/ca/en/personal-banking/advice/budgeting/budgeting-tips
Done. Run #8 — 89% (Brand: Example Brand)
| ID | Created | URL | Score | Applicable/Total | Brand |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8 | 2/15/2026 | example-brand.com/.../budgeting-tips | 89% | 44/47 | Example Brand |
| 7 | 2/15/2026 | competitor-3.example/.../cash-back | 86% | 44/47 | Competitor 3 |
| 6 | 12/2/2025 | example-brand.com/.../good-financial-habits | 80% | 45/47 | Example Brand |
Tables scroll horizontally on smaller screens, matching the compact dashboard style.
What this tool does
It turns page quality review into a repeatable scoring process.
Instead of manually checking a page against a long E-E-A-T checklist, users submit a URL and receive a structured audit. The tool reviews visible page content, headings, metadata, and rendered content, then scores each rubric question against the expected answer.
It is especially useful for SEO analysts, content strategists, editors, product-content teams, and reviewers who need consistent evidence-based feedback across brands or page types.
The problem it solves
Less scattered feedback. More usable evidence.
E-E-A-T reviews can become inconsistent when every reviewer uses a different checklist or writes feedback in a different format. EEAT Scoring gives teams a shared rubric, a run history, brand filters, overall percentages, and question-level explanations that are easier to compare and act on.
47
rubric questions seeded from the local EEAT model
7
main assessment areas in the current rubric
Yes/No/N/A
answer statuses with score handling
History
saved runs stored in a local JSON database
How it works
A simple workflow from login to structured report.
The current app is URL-audit focused: users log in, choose or set a brand, submit a URL, and review saved scoring results.
Set a brand
Tag the run with a brand such as Example Brand, Competitor 1, Example Brand, Example Division, or Competitor 3, then filter history by that brand.
Enter a URL
Paste a valid http or https page URL into the dashboard and submit it using the same Score URL flow already in the app.
Analyze the page
The server fetches the rendered page, extracts key content signals, and scores each rubric question using the configured model.
Review the report
The run is saved with score, date, URL, brand, applicable count, and grouped explanations for every rubric item.
Main features
Designed around the actual dashboard flow.
These features are based on the current routes, templates, client JavaScript, database structure, and EEAT rubric file.
Structured E-E-A-T rubric
Scores pages against 47 questions across helpfulness, relevancy, quality, expertise, presentation, page experience, and site-wide signals.
Rendered URL analysis
Uses the server-side page fetcher to collect title, canonical, metadata, headings, article/body text, and visible rendered content.
Overall scoring
Calculates an overall percentage from applicable questions and stores total versus applicable question counts for each run.
Question-level explanations
Shows expected answer, model answer, confidence, score, and explanation for each rubric question grouped by area.
Brand tagging and filters
Users can set a brand before scoring and filter recent runs so reviews stay organized by client, product line, or content group.
Login and role visibility
Protected routes require a session. Standard users see their own runs, while admins can see user ownership in the run table.
UI snapshots / product walkthrough
Realistic previews of the main tool screens.
These are HTML/CSS recreations based on the existing templates and stylesheet. They use realistic demo data from the current dashboard and saved-run format.
Login screen
A minimal protected entry point with username, password, login status, and the same dark card styling as the app.
EEAT Scoring Login
Username
Password
Logging in…
Dashboard
After login, users see their identity, logout action, brand controls, URL scoring form, status text, and recent runs table.
Brand: Example Brand
Filter Brand ▾
Current brand: Example Brand
| ID | URL | Score | Brand |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8 | example-brand.com/.../budgeting-tips | 89% | Example Brand |
| 7 | competitor-3.example/.../cash-back | 86% | Competitor 3 |
New audit input
The app’s audit input is intentionally direct: set a brand, enter a URL, and submit Score URL.
Score a URL
e.g. Example Brand, Competitor 1, Competitor 2
https://example.com/page
Validation: URL must start with http:// or https:// and a brand must be selected before scoring.
Progress / status screen
During scoring, the dashboard shows the same clear status language used by the current client-side code.
Scoring… this may take a little while.
72%
Fetch rendered pageDone
Extract title, meta, headings, visible textDone
Score rubric questionsRunning
Save run and resultsNext
Final report / output
Run details are grouped by rubric area and include expected answer, actual answer, confidence, score, and explanation.
Run #8
Brand: Example Brand · Overall: 89% — 44/47 applicable questions
Quality
[16] Does the page title provide a concise and helpful summary?
Expected: Yes
Answer: Yes (score: 1)
Confidence: 0.88
The title aligns with the page topic and gives users a clear summary of what the content covers.
Expertise and Experience
[24] Is it self-evident who authored the content?
Answer: No (score: 0)
No visible byline or reviewer information appears in the extracted page content.
Admin visibility
Admin users can see an extra User column in recent runs, helping separate saved audits by account owner.
| ID | Score | Brand | User |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8 | 89% | Example Brand | ahamd |
| 7 | 86% | Competitor 3 | ahamd |
| 6 | 80% | Example Brand | ahamd |
What users get
A saved report that can be reviewed, compared, and acted on.
Every run is saved with run metadata and detailed rubric results, making it easier to compare page quality over time and across brands.
Run summary
Run ID, created date, URL, brand, overall score, total questions, and applicable questions.
Area grouping
Results grouped under Helpfulness, Relevancy, Quality, Expertise, Presentation, Page Experience, and Site-wide sections.
Status and scoring
Expected answer, actual answer, score, confidence, and clear Yes, No, or N/A display treatment.
Recommendations evidence
Explanations show why each answer was chosen so users can identify content gaps and improvement opportunities.
Why this tool is useful
Built for practical review work, not just a score.
The dashboard gives teams a repeatable way to evaluate whether a page is helpful, relevant, high quality, trustworthy, well presented, and technically user-friendly. The saved history and brand filter make it easier to track improvements and compare audits without digging through separate notes or spreadsheets.
✓
Saves time
Automates the first-pass rubric review and keeps the result in one dashboard.
Automates the first-pass rubric review and keeps the result in one dashboard.
✓
Makes analysis structured
Applies the same 47-question model across every URL submitted.
Applies the same 47-question model across every URL submitted.
✓
Highlights opportunities
Low-scoring or mismatched answers point reviewers toward the most important gaps.
Low-scoring or mismatched answers point reviewers toward the most important gaps.
✓
Supports better decisions
Teams can prioritize edits using score, confidence, category, brand, and explanation detail.
Teams can prioritize edits using score, confidence, category, brand, and explanation detail.
Ready to review a page?
Open the dashboard and start a new EEAT audit.
Use the links below as placeholders or update them to match your production route/subfolder.