# Suede Visibility Grader > Grade any public page for findability, first-screen clarity, CTA pull, proof quality, and AI citation readiness. Returns A-F grades with evidence and fixes. Use before any public launch, GitHub Pages promotion, or paid campaign, or when asked to grade a page, judge promotion readiness, or give a blunt verdict on a public surface. NOT FOR: a full nine-lane SEO/schema/keyword audit (use suede-seo-a… - **Type:** Skill - **Install:** `agentstack add skill-jasoncolapietro-suede-creator-skills-suede-visibility-grader` - **Verified:** Yes — security-reviewed for prompt injection and unsafe behavior - **Seller:** [JasonColapietro](https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/jasoncolapietro) - **Installs:** 0 - **Category:** [Developer Tools](https://agentstack.voostack.com/c/developer-tools) - **Latest version:** 0.1.0 - **License:** MIT - **Upstream author:** [JasonColapietro](https://github.com/JasonColapietro) - **Source:** https://github.com/JasonColapietro/suede-creator-skills/tree/main/skills/suede-visibility-grader - **Website:** https://jasoncolapietro.github.io/suede-creator-skills/ ## Install ```sh agentstack add skill-jasoncolapietro-suede-creator-skills-suede-visibility-grader ``` Requires the [AgentStack CLI](https://agentstack.voostack.com/docs/cli). Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and any MCP-compatible agent. ## About # Suede Visibility Grader Use this skill when a website, GitHub Pages site, launch page, creator page, docs surface, or campaign page needs a blunt grade for visibility and action. The goal is not generic SEO advice. The goal is to answer one question: ```text Can the right person or agent find this page, understand it, trust it, cite it, and take the intended next action? ``` **Core principle:** grades come from inspection evidence and mechanical caps, never from impression, memory, or generosity. ## Routing Send to `suede-seo-audit` for: Core Web Vitals, crawl errors, structured data validation, keyword gap analysis, backlink profile, redirect chains, or page speed. Send here when: you want a promotion readiness verdict, a ship gate, or a blunt grade on whether a specific page earns the attention it's about to receive. After grading: fixes are conversion-shaped (CTA, friction, offer) → `suede-site-alchemy`. Grade passed and the page ships as part of a release → `suede-launch-packaging`. ## Source Truth Inspect before grading. Do not grade from memory or description alone. - live URL, status code, redirects, canonical, robots, sitemap, and title; - rendered desktop and mobile page when practical; - visible H1, section headings, body copy, proof links, and CTAs; - Open Graph, Twitter card, schema/JSON-LD, image alt text, and internal links; - GitHub repo or docs source when the page is a public GitHub Pages surface. Do not grade from memory alone. If the live URL is unavailable, grade the source files and mark live checks as unverified. ## Grade Lanes Score each lane A-F, then give one overall grade: - **Findability:** status, canonical, robots, sitemap, title, description, durable keywords, and duplicate URL risk. - **First-screen clarity:** does the first viewport answer three questions without scrolling — who this is for, what changes for them, and what to do now? Grade on the rendered first viewport, not the document structure. - **CTA pull:** primary action, secondary proof action, button text, link targets, and whether the visitor has a reason to click now. - **Proof and trust:** screenshots, commands, docs, manifests, live routes, source files, receipts, authorship, and claim boundaries. - **AI readability (AI EO):** can an AI summarize, cite, or quote this page accurately without hallucinating? Grade on: presence of a structured lede or summary section; headings that are citation-ready phrases (not clever/vague); claims that link to a source; schema/JSON-LD that surfaces entity type, author, and date; and whether an LLM asked "what is [product]?" would return a correct, attributable answer from this page. AI readability sub-rubric (each item is worth one grade step): - Structured lede: first 100 words answer "what is this, who is it for, what does it do" without jargon. - Citation-ready headings: headings read as answer fragments an LLM would quote directly. "Getting started" = F. "How to install X in 3 commands" = A. - Sourceable claims: every quantitative or comparative claim links to a source or shows primary evidence. - Entity schema: JSON-LD or OpenGraph declares entity type, author/organization, and published date. - Internal link density: at least one link to a more-detailed resource per major section. - AI test: if an LLM were asked "what is [product/page topic]?" right now, would this page produce a correct, non-hallucinated answer? If no, cap AI readability at C. - **Design signal:** grades on seven axes — each is pass/fail, grade is the worst three: 1. Hierarchy: H1 > H2 > body weight is visually obvious at a glance. 2. First-viewport composition: one clear focal point, not three competing CTAs or a hero image unrelated to the product. 3. Spacing rhythm: consistent padding/margin system. No collapsed margins or random gutters. 4. Typography: one or two font families. Body copy readable at 16px equivalent. Line length under 80ch. 5. Asset quality: images are sharp, not stretched, not stock-obvious, not AI-slop. 6. Contrast: primary CTA passes WCAG AA. Body text passes WCAG AA. 7. AI-slop pattern risk: the page does not read as generated filler (vague value props, stock faces, generic icons, paragraph-length sentences with no specificity). If two or more slop signals are present, cap Design signal at C. Grade meaning — assign on evidence, not impression: - **A:** every lane is strong (no lane below B). Ship. Post this as a reference for the next build. - **B:** one or two lanes at C; none below C. Fix those; everything else is solid. - **C:** three or more lanes at C, or any lane at D. The page works but bleeds attention or trust somewhere in the first scroll. Not ready for paid promotion. - **D:** two or more lanes at D, or any lane at F short of the overall-F conditions. Visible but embarrassing under scrutiny. A focused rewrite of one surface fixes it. - **F:** assign when any of these are true: primary CTA is broken, a public claim is false, the page doesn't render, or robots/canonical actively blocks it. Grade caps — non-negotiable: - No live inspection → Overall cap: `C`. - Broken primary CTA → Overall cap: `D`. - False or unsupported public claim → Overall cap: `D`. (If the claim is central to the product promise, `F`.) - Design signal `D` or `F` → Ship gate is **hold**, regardless of other lanes. - Mobile not inspected → `A` is blocked. State the caveat explicitly in Verification. Ship gate — mechanical: - **ship:** Overall B or better, no grade cap triggered, no lane below C. - **ship-with-caveats:** Overall C, or a higher grade blocked only by uninspected surfaces (mobile, live URL). Name every caveat in Verification. - **hold:** Overall D or F, broken primary CTA, false public claim, or Design signal at D or F. ## Surface-Type Standards Grade each page against its surface type. Caps and expectations differ: **Landing page (marketing, campaign, product launch)** - First-screen clarity and CTA pull are the primary gates. A page that can't convert in the first viewport fails at its job. - Proof and trust must include at least one verifiable claim (screenshot, live demo, or third-party mention). Testimonials without attribution cap Proof at C. - A is only available if the CTA pull lane is A or B. **GitHub Pages / repo README** - Findability matters less (GitHub handles most of it). First-screen clarity and AI readability are the primary gates. - The H1 must match or closely shadow the repo name and primary use case. A generic "Welcome to [repo]" caps First-screen clarity at C. - Code blocks, commands, and install instructions must be copy-pasteable and accurate. One broken command caps Proof at D. - AI readability grade is elevated: LLMs frequently cite GitHub READMEs. A missing structured summary or absent "What is this?" section caps AI readability at C. **Product page (within an existing product, not top-of-funnel)** - Proof and trust is the primary gate. The visitor already has intent; the page must close. - Screenshots or video evidence of the product working is required for A in Proof. - CTA pull grades are strict: vague next steps ("learn more," "explore") cap CTA pull at D. **Documentation page** - AI readability is the primary gate. Docs are the most-cited content by AI systems. - Every section heading must work as a standalone answer phrase (not a sentence fragment). - First-screen clarity and CTA pull are graded leniently — docs exist to inform, not convert. - Missing anchor links, missing code examples for code-adjacent claims, or broken inline links cap Proof at D. ## Grade Modes **Quick grade** — triggered when asked for a fast read, first impression, or "gut check": - Grade the first viewport only (rendered desktop). - Score all six lanes based on what is visible without scrolling. - Output: one paragraph + lane grades + ship gate. No top fixes list. - Cap: Quick grades cannot assign A. Max is B. **Deep grade** (default): - Full inspection: live URL + source, desktop + mobile, all viewport states available. - All six lanes, full top-fixes list, CTA rewrite in the P1 fix description if CTA pull is C or below. - Ship gate is authoritative. ## Red Flags — Stop If you catch yourself thinking any of these, stop and inspect: - "The repo description tells me enough to grade." — Inspect the live page or source. No inspection caps Overall at C. - "Desktop looks fine; mobile will match." — Mobile not inspected blocks A. Check it or state the caveat. - "That claim is probably true." — Unverified public claims cap the grade. Verify or flag it. - "Every other lane is strong; I'll round up." — Grades come from lane evidence and caps, not generosity. - "A quick look is enough for a deep grade." — Quick mode exists for that, and it caps at B. ## Output Format ```text Simple explanation: Plain-language summary of the grade and the one biggest fix. Usual breakdown: URL or source: Surface type: Primary reader: Primary action: Live/source status: Screenshot evidence: Viewport sizes: Visual states checked: Visual states not checked: Grades: Findability: A-F First-screen clarity: A-F CTA pull: A-F Proof and trust: A-F AI readability: A-F Design signal: A-F Overall: A-F Top fixes (max 5, ranked by impact on ship gate): 1. [P1] Lane affected | Location | Evidence (quote or describe exactly what was seen) | One-line patch 2. [P2] Lane affected | Location | Evidence | One-line patch 3. [P3] Lane affected | Location | Evidence | One-line patch Verification: What was checked: What was not checked: Ship gate: ship | ship-with-caveats | hold ``` ## Sample Report ```text Simple explanation: The page is findable, but the first screen does not make the action obvious. Fix the hero CTA and mobile proof block before promotion. Usual breakdown: URL or source: https://example.com Surface type: landing page Primary reader: creator preparing a release package Primary action: start the release-readiness audit Live/source status: live page inspected, source not available Screenshot evidence: screenshots/home-desktop.png, screenshots/home-mobile.png Viewport sizes: 1440x900, 390x844 Visual states checked: default desktop, default mobile, primary CTA hover Visual states not checked: dark mode, logged-in state Grades: Findability: B First-screen clarity: C CTA pull: D Proof and trust: B AI readability: B Design signal: C Overall: C Top fixes (max 5, ranked by impact on ship gate): 1. [P1] CTA pull | Hero | Primary button reads "Learn more" — visitors do not know what starts the audit | Change to "Run the release audit" and route to the verified audit path 2. [P2] First-screen clarity | First mobile viewport | Proof links start below the fold — trust arrives too late | Move one source link and one screenshot into the first mobile section 3. [P3] Design signal | Hero media | Artwork does not show a release artifact — weak product signal | Replace with a rights/provenance preview or an approved product screenshot Verification: What was checked: live URL, desktop viewport, mobile viewport, primary CTA hover state, Open Graph tags What was not checked: dark mode, logged-in state, source files Ship gate: ship-with-caveats ``` ## Source & license This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code. - **Author:** [JasonColapietro](https://github.com/JasonColapietro) - **Source:** [JasonColapietro/suede-creator-skills](https://github.com/JasonColapietro/suede-creator-skills) - **License:** MIT - **Homepage:** https://jasoncolapietro.github.io/suede-creator-skills/ Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above. ## Pricing - **Free** — Free ## Security capabilities Automated source analysis of v0.1.0 — what this tool can access: - **Network access:** no - **Filesystem access:** no - **Shell / process execution:** no - **Environment & secrets:** no - **Dynamic code execution:** no *"Yes" means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it is unsafe.* ## Versions - **0.1.0** — security scan: passed — Imported from the upstream source. ## Links - Listing page: https://agentstack.voostack.com/l/skill-jasoncolapietro-suede-creator-skills-suede-visibility-grader - Seller: https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/jasoncolapietro - Browse the marketplace: https://agentstack.voostack.com/browse --- Listed on AgentStack — the marketplace for AI agent skills and MCP servers. Every listing is security-reviewed. Creators keep 70%.