The playbook
Hreflang Tags: Checklist
Use this hreflang tags checklist before a new release, a handoff, or a scheduled review. Its purpose is to verify the decisions that affect valid alternate-page relationships. Check an actual page or query record; a box marked complete without evidence does not show that the customer journey works.
Put the task in context
Map equivalent localized pages together and check the references in both directions. The French version of a service guide should refer to its actual English equivalent, not automatically to the English homepage. Verify that alternate destinations are available and appropriate.
Before you use the checklist
Name the exact item being checked and its purpose. Gather URL, language, alternate URL, reciprocal check. If one of those details is unknown, mark it as unknown and assign a way to resolve it. An invented value makes the checklist look complete while weakening every later decision.
Working checklist
| Check | Evidence to keep | Responsible role |
|---|---|---|
| Create a complete set of equivalent localized URLs | A dated observation showing how URL was verified | SEO lead |
| Check language codes and reciprocal references | A dated observation showing how language was verified | content or development owner |
| Keep canonical choices consistent with localization | A dated observation showing how alternate URL was verified | analytics owner |
Check the failure path
- Look specifically for this failure: referencing pages that are unavailable or not equivalent.
- Repair the alternate set and remove unsupported mappings. Record the actual correction, not just the intention to make it.
- Repeat the affected task after the correction and check reciprocal check.
- Make sure the next owner can find the decision and supporting evidence.
Use three outcomes for each check
Mark an item as complete only when the expected behavior or information has been observed. Mark it as incomplete when a required condition is absent. Use not applicable when the condition genuinely does not belong to the chosen scope, and write a short reason. These states keep a review useful without forcing every process into an identical mold.
For example, if the check is “Create a complete set of equivalent localized URLs,” a meeting about the subject is not the evidence itself. Retain the relevant URL and language, the decision made from them, and the result of checking that decision. The record should allow someone who missed the meeting to understand what changed.
Decide what must be resolved first
An incomplete item that prevents identify equivalent pages intended for different language or regional audiences deserves attention before a cosmetic improvement. Assign an owner and a next action to that issue. Keep optional refinements visible, but do not let them obscure a failure in the core process.
Close the review
Recheck corrected items and note anything still uncertain. The checklist is finished when the next owner understands what was verified and what remains open. Follow valid alternate-page relationships using a consistent definition so later reviews can connect execution quality with useful results.
Test representative templates as well as individual URLs. When a problem appears on several pages built from the same component, a template correction may be more useful than a series of one-off edits. Verify the affected pages after the shared change.
Skip the manual steps. Let AgentixSEO run this for every client.
Start now