The playbook
Topical Authority: Checklist
Use this topical authority checklist before a new release, a handoff, or a scheduled review. Its purpose is to verify the decisions that affect topic coverage and qualified visits. 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
For local search, a coherent collection might explain profiles, service pages, listings, reviews, measurement, and multi-location operations. The collection should connect these tasks and explain their differences. Treat coverage as an editorial responsibility rather than a fixed number of articles to achieve.
Before you use the checklist
Name the exact item being checked and its purpose. Gather topic, core resource, supporting resource, evidence. 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Define the scope of a topic your team understands | A dated observation showing how topic was verified | SEO lead |
| Connect foundational resources to detailed applications | A dated observation showing how core resource was verified | content or development owner |
| Maintain sources examples and internal navigation over time | A dated observation showing how supporting resource was verified | analytics owner |
Check the failure path
- Look specifically for this failure: assuming a fixed article count guarantees authority.
- Evaluate whether the collection actually resolves the audience's questions. Record the actual correction, not just the intention to make it.
- Repeat the affected task after the correction and check evidence.
- 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 “Define the scope of a topic your team understands,” a meeting about the subject is not the evidence itself. Retain the relevant topic and core resource, 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 build a useful body of related content supported by knowledge and evidence 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 topic coverage and qualified visits using a consistent definition so later reviews can connect execution quality with useful results.
Keep a dated record of the page or query being examined. Search interfaces and external references can change. A saved observation should include enough context to distinguish an old issue from the current state.
Skip the manual steps. Let AgentixSEO run this for every client.
Start now