一份真實的審核報告，對象是我們自家網站

About this document

Contents, basis and control

1. Sec. 1Scores and the three actionsWhere the site stands, what recovers most, and what the score covers3
2. Sec. 2Where the site stands, by areaEvery category of the rubric, its shape and its contribution4
3. Sec. 3Findings and recommendationsEvery open finding, with evidence, effort and owner6
4. Sec. 4Risk and business impactWhat the open findings put at stake for a site of this size11
5. App. AHow the score is builtFormula, weights, bands, severities and the two rules that move a letter12
6. App. BTest results in fullAll 74 scored checks, grouped by category, each with its own output14
7. App. CReported but not scoredThe 19 checks excluded from the arithmetic, and why18
8. App. DBasis of preparationScope, method, crawlers named, limits, responsibilities19

Scope and basis

This report states the result of an automated technical assessment of hdbcalculator.com, run on 9 September 2026 against published criteria (Rubric 0.3.0 · test map 0.2.0, reproduced in Appendix A). All 27 URLs declared in the sitemap were fetched for status and for the link graph. The tests that read a page in depth — structured data, headings, answer structure, authorship, fact density — read the homepage and a 5-page sample. Every figure in this document is a check's own output or arithmetic on those outputs. No figure was produced by a language model.

Section 1 of 4 · Scores

Scores and the three actions

65 of 74 scored checks pass and two fail. The three actions below recover 5.0 Search SEO and 5.4 points of AI Visibility; all 9 together recover 10.2 and 7.6.

Where the site stands. Search SEO reads band B and AI Visibility band A (the band table is in Appendix A). The rubric drops a letter at 8 open findings on an axis — this site has 7 on Search SEO and 4 on AI Visibility — and the cap binds only on a severity-5 failure, where the most severe failure here is severity 2.

Where it fails. T7 — sitemap <lastmod>. 1/27 missing lastmod. It recovers 1.3 Search SEO points and is minutes of work.

What I recommend, in this order

Points are not additive. Each figure above is what that fix recovers on its own; two fixes in one category share a denominator. Fixing all 9 recovers 10.2 and 7.6 points — computed once, not added up (Appendix A).

Section 2 of 4 · By area

Where the site stands, by area

Both scores are a weighted mean of category values. Every weight, count and contribution is printed so the headline can be recomputed from these two pages alone.

The two axes overlap. 14 of the 74 scored checks score on both axes, so this column and the AI column on the next page cannot be added together. Re-normalisation. 3 Search SEO categories are not applicable to this site (E-commerce, Local, International). Their weight leaves the denominator entirely rather than scoring zero, so the active weights re-normalise to 100 and the site is not penalised for lacking what it has no reason to have.

Section 2 of 4 · By area (continued)

Where the site stands, by area

llms.txt carries weight 0. Measured and reported, and contributing nothing to the score, because no answer engine has been shown to read it. It sits in the table so that its absence from the arithmetic is visible rather than silent.

Section 3 of 4 · Findings

Findings and recommendations

Two failed checks and seven warnings, ordered by what each recovers against what it costs to fix. Each carries the check's own output as evidence, so the observation can be verified without us.

Section 3 of 4 · Findings (continued)

Findings and recommendations

Section 3 of 4 · Findings (continued)

Findings and recommendations

Section 3 of 4 · Findings (continued)

Findings and recommendations

Section 3 of 4 · Findings (continued)

Findings and recommendations

Nothing else is open. The remaining 65 scored checks pass and are listed with their own output in Appendix B. 19 further checks are excluded from the score in one direction or the other, each with its reason, in Appendix C.

Section 4 of 4 · Risk

Risk and business impact

Four failure classes are open. Sized to this property, this page says which of them is real and which is close to noise.

The one that would keep me up. Identity. 4 of the 9 open findings sit in it — S4, EN2, EN3, EE4 — and together they recover 2.0 Search SEO points and 7.7 AI Visibility points. Nothing outside this domain corroborates who runs it. That is the signal an assistant most needs before naming a source, and the one a competitor with a register entry and a professional profile already has.

Appendix A

How the score is built

Everything needed to recompute both headline figures: the formula, the status factors, the band table, the severity scale, and the two rules that can move a letter without moving a number.

Appendix A (continued)

How the score is built

Where these numbers come from. Rubric 0.3.0 is our transcription of one published scoring document, not an industry standard, and the test map 0.2.0 binds each of the 74 scored checks to exactly one module. Both versions are on the cover so that two reports can be compared only when they were scored by the same rules. Another practitioner's weights would produce another number from the same facts — which is why the weights are printed rather than asserted.

Appendix B

Test results in full

All 74 scored checks, grouped by the category each one scores in, each printed with the output it actually returned. The 19 excluded checks are in Appendix C.

Appendix B (continued)

Test results in full

Appendix B (continued)

Test results in full

Appendix B (continued)

Test results in full

Reading a row. “What it returned” is the check's own output string, unedited — this is the evidence, not a summary of it. Where a check sampled rather than read everything, the sample is in that string. Severity is the rubric's, fixed per check and not set per site. A check appears once, under the category it scores in; a check that scores on both axes does so from that single row.

Appendix C

Reported but not scored

Every check that was run and then left out of the arithmetic, with the reason. Exclusion runs in both directions: none of these could have earned a point, and none could have cost one.

Why this appendix exists. A scoring system that silently drops the checks it cannot run flatters every site it touches. Each exclusion above would otherwise have been a free pass on one site and a free failure on another, so all of it is here instead, named, with the exclusion running in both directions: none of these could have earned a point, and none could have cost one.

Appendix D

Basis of preparation

What was measured, how, by whom, with what limits, and where the line falls between our responsibility and yours.

No ranking is promised. Nothing in this report predicts a position, a traffic level or a revenue outcome, and no recommendation in it is conditional on one. The recommendations concern hygiene, indexability and citability: what can be measured before and after, on your own site.