Crawl and indexation
A technical SEO audit checks whether Google and AI crawlers can reach, index, and correctly read every page that should bring you a customer, then hands your developer one ordered list of what to fix. I run the same five checks against this site's own build before I run them against a client's. I'm Nipun Arora, a technical SEO and AI search visibility consultant working since 2014, and the audit is usually where an engagement starts.
What the audit covers
Every finding in the fix list traces back to one of five checks, run against the pages customers actually reach, not a staging copy and not a generic template of findings.
Can Google and the AI crawlers reach the page at all, or does a robots.txt rule, a redirect chain, or a dead link stop them first. The sitemap, the robots.txt file, and every hop between an old URL and its replacement get checked against the live site, not a staging copy.
A crawler reaching a page is not the same as that page staying in the index. A canonical tag pointing at the wrong URL, a noindex left over from staging, or two pages saying the same thing all cost you a listing quietly. A page that looks complete in a browser and arrives half-built for a crawler runs into the same problem from a different direction.
Slow pages lose visibility and customers at the same time. The audit names the slow pages and the three current metrics behind them, LCP, INP, and CLS, rather than burying the finding in a single score nobody can act on.
Schema.org JSON-LD tells a crawler what a page is, in a format it does not have to guess at. A page that never states it in markup leaves the machine to infer the entity from prose, and a machine forced to guess tends to guess wrong.
How link equity actually moves through the site, from a page Google already trusts to one that needs it, and whether a page that matters sits one click from the homepage or four. A strong page nobody links to might as well not exist to a crawler.
This page's own JSON-LD, sitemap, and internal links pass the same five checks before any client's site does. View source if you want to check that claim yourself.
The full 25-item version of this checklist, in the exact order I run it, is public: The Technical SEO Audit Checklist I Use.
What you receive
A technical SEO audit hands you four things, and the fix list is the one that matters most: everything else exists to make it right.
This is a fixed-scope engagement: one number, agreed before I open your site, with nothing added after. That number is not published on this page. Send a note through the contact page with your domain and I'll quote a fixed price before any work starts.
Send your domain and I'll scope the audit.
Request a technical auditWho this is for
A technical SEO audit fits an owner who already gets some traffic and cannot see what happens to it between a search and a click.
Leads come through Google today, and increasingly through what an AI assistant recommends, and you have never seen what either one says about you when a customer asks.
Your developer can fix almost anything once somebody names what to fix and in what order. So far, nobody has.
Your site looks complete in a browser, and you suspect the crawler deciding whether customers ever see it is working from a different picture.
Your last SEO report was a page of scores nobody acted on. This time you want a document that ends in a fix, not another meeting.
One requirement sits under all four: somebody on your side who can act on a fix list. Buyers who want me to make the fixes myself, or who want the same checks run again after changes ship, can say so through the contact page; both fold into the same conversation rather than a separate product.
Two published case studies ran this exact audit: BookMySafari's crawl and schema-graph work, and an anonymized penalty recovery diagnosed through the same crawl-first process.
How this relates to AI search visibility
A technical SEO audit and an AI search visibility engagement share the same foundation: a page a crawler cannot reach or read helps neither Google nor an AI assistant.
This audit covers crawlability, indexation, Core Web Vitals, structured data, and internal linking, the mechanical layer both surfaces depend on. It stops before citation and entity work: whether ChatGPT, Perplexity, or Google AI Mode name your business correctly in an answer is a separate, more specialized measurement, covered on the AI search visibility page. If Dubai is the specific market you're hiring for, start at SEO consultant in Dubai instead. The full engagement process, and how each of the six services fits together, is on the approach page and the services index.
Questions
Five checks: crawlability, indexation, Core Web Vitals, structured data, and internal linking, each run against the live site and traced to something measured there, not an opinion.
Repeat it right after a redesign or a migration, since both change what a crawler sees overnight. Outside of that, a common cadence is once a quarter for a site that keeps changing; a site that rarely changes needs it less often.
Someone who can implement the fix list: in-house, freelance, or hired later. The audit still runs if that person doesn't exist yet. A site with nobody able to act on findings is itself a finding worth having in writing.
No. The audit is the diagnosis, a fix list your developer can act on. Implementing it is separate work; mention it when you reach out and I'll quote it, or hand the same list to whoever already maintains your site.
This page doesn't publish a number, because the audit is scoped to your site before a price is set. Send your domain through the contact page and I'll quote a fixed number before I open anything.
Yes. Core Web Vitals is one of the five checks, and it is scored against the current standard: LCP, INP (which replaced FID as the interactivity metric), and CLS. INP gets its own line in the fix list, not a generic 'improve performance' note.
Send your domain and what you want checked, and I'll scope a fixed-price technical SEO audit before I open anything.
Request a technical audit