Free interactive tool
Content Durability Scorer
The content durability scorer turns your own Search Console numbers for one page — monthly impressions and clicks, position band, and age — plus three honest yes/no answers (original evidence, overlap with another page, AI-Overview exposure) into a scored keep, cut, merge, or refresh verdict, with the reasoning shown line by line. It encodes the scoring rubric from this site’s own AI Overviews content audit and post-AI durability audit: evidence and reader task outrank raw traffic, overlap drives merges, AI-Overview exposure is context rather than a deletion trigger, and cut is always the last verdict standing — never the first.
The rubric
score = demand(0–3) + evidence(0–3) + position(0–3)
+ freshness(0–3) + uniqueness(0–3) → /15
verdict rules, in order:
1 overlap and no original evidence → MERGE
2 no evidence, no demand, no ranking → CUT (after review)
3 missing evidence, stale (12mo+), or weak
CTR in the top 10 → REFRESH
4 otherwise → KEEPHow this score works: the 0–3 dimensions come from the AI Overviews content audit; the keep/refresh/retire logic from the post-AI durability audit. Both are this site’s own editorial heuristics, not a Google ranking factor or a documented Google signal — Google publishes no formula for “content durability.” The numeric bands (impressions, age, the 1% CTR line) are this tool’s own stated defaults so the arithmetic is reproducible; the guides themselves score those same dimensions by editorial judgment rather than a fixed number. The only externally sourced inputs are the ones you supply yourself from Google Search Console (impressions, clicks, position).
Score your page
Only used in the copyable row — nothing is fetched or sent anywhere.
From your own Search Console performance report for this page.
Same report, same date range as the impressions.
Average position for the page's main queries.
Real re-verification of facts, not a cosmetic re-date.
First-hand tests, screenshots, real numbers, templates, worked examples.
Another URL of yours serves the same reader task or query.
Check the live SERP for the page's main queries.
- Demand evidence
- 3/3
- Original evidence
- 0/3
- Position strength
- 2/3
- Freshness
- 1/3
- Uniqueness (overlap reversed)
- 3/3
- Durability score
- 9/15
Why (the rubric, shown)
- Rule fired: rewrite/refresh signals present → refresh.
- It has demand or a ranking foothold but no original evidence — assign the missing artifact by name (screenshot, worked example, claim ledger), not "improve this page."
- 14 months without a substantive update — re-verify dated claims and re-date the review, not a cosmetic re-post.
- Impressions are healthy but CTR is 0.75% while ranking in the top 10 — a title, snippet, or opening-answer mismatch to fix first.
- Its queries face AI Overviews and the page has nothing a summary cannot reproduce — the refresh must add what earns the remaining click.
- Demand 3/3 — 1,200 impressions/mo at 0.75% CTR. Search Console rows are evidence; treat missing demand as a prompt to check other roles, not proof of worthlessness.
- Evidence 0/3 — no original evidence or artifact; this is the strongest rewrite-or-merge signal in the audit rubric.
- Position 2/3 and freshness 1/3 (14 months since last substantive update).
- Overlap 3/3 — this page is a unique intent owner.
- AI-Overview exposure: noted as a context signal only — per the audit rubric it is never a deletion trigger by itself.
Worksheet row (tab-separated — paste into a spreadsheet)
Next: one page scored is a start; a portfolio decided is the job. Run the full defend/rewrite/merge/kill spreadsheet from the AI Overviews content audit across your cluster, and batch your rows there.
The pre-filled numbers are a labeled hypothetical example, not a benchmark. Use your own Search Console rows, and treat the verdict as a triage aid for your editorial judgment — not a promise about rankings or traffic.
Worked example (hypothetical numbers)
A two-year-old explainer gets 1,200 impressions and 9 clicks a month (0.75% CTR) at positions 4–10, was last substantively updated 14 months ago, has no original evidence, no overlapping sibling, and faces an AI Overview (hypothetical numbers, not a benchmark). It scores 9/15 — and the verdict is refresh, not cut: demand is real, so the assignment is to add the missing artifact, re-verify the dated claims, and fix the title/snippet mismatch behind the weak CTR. The same page with no impressions, no ranking, and an overlapping sibling would score as a merge; with no sibling either, as a cut candidate — after checking its internal-link and support roles.