Technical SEO that gets the right fixes shipped.

Show the failure on representative URLs

We reproduce the issue across the templates it affects and record the response code, source HTML, rendered output, canonical, index directive, internal path, and Search Console evidence that matter. A sampled product problem is labelled as a template hypothesis until the wider pattern is checked.

For example, a filtered collection may be linked throughout the store, canonicalized to a parent, included in a sitemap, and still return unique products. The recommendation has to resolve those conflicting signals rather than telling a developer to ‘fix canonicals’.

• Affected template and example URLs
• Expected search behaviour
• Evidence and confidence
• Estimated reach and business priority

Separate the SEO decision from the implementation option

The SEO requirement describes the outcome: which version should be indexable, discoverable, canonical, internally linked, and present in the sitemap. Engineering can then choose the safest platform-specific implementation with those acceptance criteria intact.

When several options exist, we document the trade-off. A server-side redirect, template rule, navigation change, or rendering change can solve different parts of the same symptom. The final ticket names the dependency and the person who can approve it.

Prioritise by affected demand, not issue count

One problem affecting a high-value category template can matter more than hundreds of low-value warnings. We combine page importance, query demand, current visibility, template reach, implementation effort, and risk when setting priority.

The technical roadmap also shows what should wait. Fixing every crawl-tool warning at once hides the constraints that are actually preventing useful pages from being discovered or understood.