URL SEO Audit
Fetch a page and check its title, meta description, canonical, robots directives, Open Graph tags, headings and status code.
Results are provided as is, for general information. Check anything important before relying on it. See the Terms of Use.
About this tool
A one-page technical-SEO snapshot of a live URL: the title and its length, the meta description and its length, the canonical link, the meta robots directive alongside the separate X-Robots-Tag HTTP header (the two can disagree), the Open Graph and Twitter Card tags, the full heading outline with an H1 count, and the HTTP status — following any redirect chain to get there. Unlike this site's client-side tools, auditing a URL means fetching it, so this tool sends the URL you enter to our server, which fetches the page behind a human-verification check (the same Turnstile-protected, SSRF-guarded fetch the Sitemap Extractor and Link Preview tools use) and parses the result.
When to use it
Questions
Why does this tool report both a meta robots tag and an X-Robots-Tag header separately?
They're independent, additive signals — a crawler honors both, and either one alone can set noindex. It's common for a CMS to render a clean 'index, follow' meta tag while a CDN, reverse proxy, or staging-environment header injects X-Robots-Tag: noindex further up the stack, silently deindexing a page that looks fine in view-source. Checking both closes exactly that blind spot.
What's actually wrong with having zero or multiple H1 headings?
It's a soft signal, not a hard rule — HTML5 technically allows multiple H1s (one per sectioning element), and Google has said it doesn't penalize multiple H1s outright. That said, exactly one H1 that states the page's main topic remains the near-universal SEO and accessibility convention (screen reader users rely on a single H1 to orient on a page), so this tool flags both zero and multiple as worth a second look, not as a hard failure.
Why does the tool report the canonical URL instead of just confirming it exists?
A present-but-wrong canonical is a more common and more damaging mistake than a missing one — a canonical pointing at a different page (a wildcard-fallback template value that never got replaced, or a lowercase/uppercase mismatch) tells search engines to consolidate ranking signal onto that other URL instead. Seeing the actual resolved canonical value is what lets you catch that class of bug; a checkbox for 'has a canonical' would miss it entirely.
The audit follows a redirect chain — why does that matter for SEO?
If the URL you enter redirects before rendering, the meta/heading/OG data this tool reports is necessarily the destination page's data, not the URL you typed — and the tool shows you that chain explicitly so it's not a silent surprise. A redirect chain is also itself worth checking: multiple hops before the real destination add latency and (for older 302-style redirects) can complicate how link equity consolidates; the companion Redirect Checker tool goes deeper on that specifically.
How is this different from just viewing the page source in my browser?
View-source shows you the HTML as your browser received it, from your network, past any auth/geo/bot-detection rules that treat you differently than a crawler. This tool fetches with a generic browser-like user agent from our server, closer to what an anonymous crawler or a colleague without your session/VPN would actually see — useful for catching cloaking, geo-gated content, or a CDN rule that behaves differently for logged-out requests.
Why is there a title-length and description-length count?
Google doesn't enforce a hard character limit, but truncates the rendered snippet by pixel width, which correlates loosely with character count — the practical guidance most SEOs use is roughly 50-60 characters for a title and 150-160 for a description before truncation becomes likely. This tool reports the raw character count as a quick sanity check; the SERP Snippet Preview tool models the actual pixel-based truncation if you want the precise picture.
Why does this tool need a human-verification check but most of this site's tools don't?
Every other client-side tool never leaves your browser, so there's no server-side fetch to abuse. This tool (like the Sitemap Extractor and Link Preview tools) makes an outbound request from our infrastructure on your behalf, which — without a check — a bot could exploit to turn this endpoint into a free open proxy for scanning arbitrary internal or third-party URLs at scale. Turnstile is the guard against that, not a check on you personally.
Can this replace a full SEO audit or crawler tool?
No — this is a single-URL, single-request snapshot, not a site-wide crawl. It won't find orphan pages, can't check PageSpeed/Core Web Vitals, doesn't render JavaScript (so a client-rendered SPA's real content may not appear in what it parses), and doesn't check internal linking structure. Use it for a fast one-page gut-check; reach for a dedicated crawler (Screaming Frog, Sitebulb, or similar) for a full-site audit.
Does this tool render JavaScript before checking the page?
No — it fetches the raw HTML response, the same as a basic crawler would, without executing any client-side JavaScript. If a page relies on client-side rendering to inject its title, meta tags, or headings, this tool (like many real crawlers, though Googlebot itself does render JS on a second pass) will report those fields as missing even though a browser would show them. That gap is itself a useful thing to know about a page's SEO setup.