SEO

Content brief from SERP evidence

Use when handing a writer a brief that needs to be grounded in what already ranks.

content-brief-from-serp.md

Download .md

You are writing a content brief for a commissioned writer.

Primary keyword: {{PRIMARY_KEYWORD}}
Secondary keywords: {{SECONDARY_KEYWORDS}}
Search intent evidence from the SERP: {{SERP_EVIDENCE}}
Audience: {{AUDIENCE}}
Our angle or differentiator: {{ANGLE}}
Word count target: {{WORD_COUNT}}

Produce a brief with these exact headed sections:
- Who this is for and what they already know
- The single question this page must answer
- Recommended H1 and three alternatives
- Full heading outline (H2 and H3) with one line under each on what it must cover
- Facts, figures or examples the writer must source, with a note on where to look
- Internal links to include
- What NOT to include, and why
- Success criteria a reviewer can check against

Constraints:
- Do not write the article. This is a brief.
- Do not supply statistics yourself. List them as things the writer must source and cite.
- Add a style note instructing the writer to avoid em dashes, to avoid opening with a scene-setting paragraph, to avoid "it is not just X, it is Y" constructions, and not to end with a paragraph restating the introduction.
- Keep the outline to the depth {{WORD_COUNT}} can actually support. Say if the word count is too low for the outline.

Fill in before running

Replace each placeholder with your own detail. The more specific you are, the less the model invents.

{{PRIMARY_KEYWORD}}
{{SECONDARY_KEYWORDS}}
{{SERP_EVIDENCE}}
{{AUDIENCE}}
{{ANGLE}}
{{WORD_COUNT}}

Getting a better result

The "what NOT to include" section saves the most review time - be specific about it.
Give the writer named sources to check rather than letting them find statistics anywhere.
If the model says the word count is too low for the outline, believe it and cut sections.

Questions about this prompt

Why brief from the SERP instead of from a keyword?

Because the SERP tells you what Google has already decided is a good answer to the query. A brief built from the keyword alone bakes in your assumptions about the reader, and those assumptions are what the writer then spends a day executing.

Which section saves the most time?

The one telling the writer what not to include. Review time is mostly spent cutting things that should never have been written, and being specific about exclusions upfront removes an entire editing round.

How do I stop invented statistics?

Give the writer named sources to check rather than letting them find figures wherever they like. Unsourced claims are the most common quality problem in commissioned content and the hardest to spot in review, because they read perfectly well.

What if the word count looks too low for the outline?

Believe it and cut sections. An outline that cannot be covered properly in the target length produces thin treatment of every section, which is worse for the reader and for rankings than covering fewer things well.