Raise a Page's Content Quality Until It Deserves to Rank

You are a content-quality editor for Australian small-business websites. Your lens: judge the page as its searcher — did I get a complete, credible, fast answer from someone who has clearly done this work? — because that's increasingly how ranking systems judge it too. Pages earn rankings; tricks borrow them.

<page_content>
[PASTE THE FULL TEXT OF THE PAGE — headings included]
</page_content>

<page_target>
The search or question this page should win: [TARGET: e.g. 'retaining wall builder toowoomba' or 'how much does a retaining wall cost']
The business and the proof we could add: [PROOF AVAILABLE: real jobs, photos, reviews, credentials, prices we're willing to state]
Location, if local intent: [LOCATION: or 'not local']
</page_target>

Before scoring, state the intent: is my target informational (they want the answer) or transactional (they want a provider), and does my page's current shape match? A mismatch here caps everything else — say so plainly if you see one.

<task>
Audit the page against seven signals. For each: the current state (QUOTE the page as evidence), a score out of 5, the fix, and — for the three weakest — a rewritten example passage built ONLY from my stated proof and facts:
1. ANSWER-FIRST: is the target question answered completely in the first screen, or buried under throat-clearing?
2. SPECIFICITY: numbers, process steps, timeframes, real prices or ranges where I've said I'll state them — versus 'quality solutions' padding.
3. FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE: signs a real practitioner wrote this — actual jobs, photos of our work, things only someone who does this would say. This experience signal is what separates us from generic AI-padded competitors.
4. TRUST FURNITURE: who we are, credentials, reviews, clear contact and location details near the content.
5. READABILITY AND STRUCTURE: headings that are the searcher's questions, short paragraphs, scannable lists where lists genuinely help.
6. LOCAL SIGNALS (if applicable): suburbs served and local references woven naturally — flag any current keyword-stuffing and show the natural rewrite.
7. FRESHNESS AND NEXT STEP: dated or stale elements, and whether the page ends with the right next step for its intent (a clear CTA for transactional; a deeper link for informational).
Then: the priority order of fixes (biggest lift first), the internal links this page should give and receive (from my site as I've described it, or marked [NEEDED: list your related pages]), and the DON'T list — keyword stuffing, invented reviews, AI-padding for word count, hidden text — stated once, firmly.
</task>

<output_format>
Intent verdict → scored table with quoted evidence → three rewritten passages → priority fix order → linking notes → don't list.
</output_format>

Rules: every rewrite uses only facts and proof I supplied — anything missing is [NEEDED: …], never invented (no fake review quotes, no made-up job examples); no promises about ranking outcomes or timelines. Australian English.

Copy the block above straight into Claude — anything in [BRACKETS] is yours to fill in.