A structured process for improving the copy on an existing page — fixing keyword targeting, tightening structure, removing weak content, and ensuring the page covers everything the top-ranking competitors cover. This is editing work, not creation work: preserve what is already good and improve what is not.
Page content optimisation is the process of improving the copy on an existing page so it ranks better for its target keyword. It is not a full rewrite — it is a targeted edit that fixes specific gaps: weak keyword coverage, missing topics that competitors cover, poor heading structure, overlong paragraphs, or unverified claims.
Unlike content creation, you start with something that already exists. Your job is to audit it against what currently ranks, identify exactly what needs to change, get sign-off on the change plan, then make the edits. Original content that is already performing well must be preserved — do not rewrite for the sake of it.
A page that ranks in positions 8–20 often needs content improvements more than it needs new links. Search engines reward pages that comprehensively cover a topic. If your page is thin, misses key subtopics, or targets the wrong keyword, more links will not fix it. Content optimisation addresses the root cause.
Done correctly, a single optimisation pass can move a page from page two to the top five within weeks — with no new content created and no links built.
| Content optimisation | Content creation |
|---|---|
| Editing an existing page | Writing a new page from scratch |
| Preserve original content that works | No original content to preserve |
| Fix specific gaps identified in the audit | Build everything from the outline up |
| Keep word budget changes minimal and intentional | Target 800–1,100 words total |
| Note what changed and why in the deliverable | No change log needed |
| 2 mandatory pause points | 4 mandatory pause points |
Open the live page and read every word of it. Do not skim. You need to understand exactly what is there before you can identify what is missing. Note:
Open a keyword tool and search for the target keyword. Note which secondary keywords and longtail variants are closely related. Then count how many times each appears in the current page.
| Keyword type | Target count in optimised page | What to check now |
|---|---|---|
| Primary keyword | 8–12 uses | Under-used, over-used, or absent in H1? |
| Secondary keywords (2–3) | 2–3 uses each | Any completely missing from the page? |
| Longtail variations | 2–4 uses total | Are question-format variants present? |
| Brand keyword | 3–5 uses | Is the brand name mentioned naturally? |
Search Google for the target keyword. Open the top 5 organic results (skip ads, maps, and news). For each competitor article, note:
With the competitor research complete, review the current page's structure against the standard rules:
Summarise everything you found into a prioritised gap list. Group gaps by type:
Be specific. "Add secondary keyword 3 times" is actionable. "Improve content quality" is not.
Not all gaps are equal. Prioritise in this order:
For each gap, write a single instruction that specifies exactly what to do. Examples of good edit instructions:
Do not write vague instructions like "improve the intro" or "add more keywords." Every instruction must state the exact change.
Estimate how many words the edits will add or remove. If the current page is 400 words and competitors average 800, plan the additions explicitly — which new sections will account for the difference. If the page is already at or above 1,100 words, focus on quality edits rather than adding more content.
Record the current word count and the target word count after edits. This is part of the sign-off document.
Open the approved edit plan alongside the current page. Work through each instruction one at a time. After each edit, re-read the surrounding sentences to confirm the change reads naturally in context.
As you write or edit, keep these rules in force for every paragraph you touch:
These rules apply to every paragraph you write or touch, not only the ones flagged in the edit plan.
Any claim you write in a new or edited paragraph must be verified against a primary source before the page goes live. The same rules as content creation apply:
Before moving to Phase 4, verify every item below against the actual edited content — not from memory:
Fix any issues before proceeding. Do not move to Phase 4 while any item is unresolved.
Check every internal link that was on the page before you started. Open each URL and confirm the destination page is still live and relevant. Record the HTTP status for each.
A broken internal link is worse than no link. Fix or remove every 404 before the page is published.
If the edit plan added new sections that naturally reference other pages on the site, propose internal links for those placements. Follow the same priority order as content creation:
The total link count across the optimised page should be 3–5. If the page already has 4 working links, you do not need to add more unless the edit plan specifically calls for it.
If the edit plan included metadata improvements, complete them now. Check every field against the standards below:
| Field | Standard | |
|---|---|---|
| Page title | 55–60 characters, primary keyword near the front, not identical to H1 | Required |
| Meta description | 150–160 characters, includes primary keyword, ends with a soft CTA | Required |
| URL slug | Only update if the current slug is severely misaligned — slug changes require a 301 redirect and must be approved by the team lead first | Caution |
Before submitting the deliverable, write a concise change log that documents exactly what was changed. This is not a summary of the page — it is a record of what you did and why, so the team lead and client can understand the edit without reading a diff.
Include: what sections were added, which headings were rewritten, what keywords were added and where, what links were fixed or added, and what metadata was updated. Note any claims that were qualified or removed during fact-checking.
{client}/page-optimisation/{page-slug}-OPT.md file if CMS access is not available{client}/reports/seo-research/competitor-analysis-{page-slug}-{YYYYMMDD}.md for future referenceEditing original copy that was not in the gap list — changing sentence structure, reworking brand voice, or "tidying up" passages that were already performing. This risks introducing regressions.
Only touch what the approved edit plan says to touch. If original content looks improvable but was not flagged as a gap, note it for a future audit rather than changing it now.
Going straight from the gap list to editing the live page without getting the plan approved. If the team lead or client disagrees with the approach, you may have to revert work already done.
Always present the edit plan before starting Phase 3. The sign-off takes five minutes and prevents unnecessary rework. Treat it as a hard gate, not a formality.
Updating the slug to include the primary keyword without implementing a 301 redirect. Every external link and bookmark to the old URL will break immediately.
Never change a slug without explicit team lead approval and a confirmed redirect plan. In most cases, leave the slug alone — the ranking benefit of a better slug is minor compared to the risk of broken links.
Adding the primary keyword to every new paragraph you write because it was under-used. This creates an unnatural keyword density that can look spammy and harm rankings.
Spread keyword additions across multiple sections. Use the target range (8–12 for primary) as a guide for the whole page, not permission to add it to every new sentence.
Adding new headings or sections without checking whether the old internal links still make sense in context. A link that pointed to a specific section may now sit in the wrong part of the page.
After structural edits, re-read every internal link in context. Confirm the anchor text still reads naturally and the placement still makes sense relative to the surrounding content.
Spending time verifying claims that were already on the page and were not part of the edit plan. This wastes time and is not required for an optimisation task.
Only fact-check new or edited content — sentences and paragraphs that you wrote or changed. The original content was the client's responsibility and is already live.
Delivering the optimised file without documenting what changed. The team lead and client cannot review the work or understand the rationale without a clear record.
Write the change log as the final step before submitting. It takes under ten minutes and is part of the deliverable. No change log means the task is not complete.
Adding content because it "feels thin" or "could be better" without a specific competitor signal or keyword gap to justify it. Vague improvements lead to scope creep and uncheckable results.
Every gap in the edit plan must trace back to a specific finding: a keyword that is missing, a topic that all competitors cover, or a formatting rule that is being violated. If you cannot name the source, it is not a gap for this task.