---
name: replace-ai-looking-content-with-real-eeat
description: "Help readers see the real work behind your claims."
category: SEO & Content Architecture
stage: —
definitive_article: /seo-tree
status: needs-work
---

# Replace AI-looking content with real EEAT

Help readers see the real work behind your claims. This guide adds clear facts and proof they can check to vague pages. Start with the page’s main promise and the true sources that support it.

**The path:** Page promise → Verified proof file → Focused rewrite → Claim and visual checks

**Start when:** A page has vague claims, weak evidence or poor reader context, regardless of which tool or person drafted it.

## Inputs

- The exact current page/source, named author, intended reader and [Goals, Content, Targeting: the result, source material and people served](https://blitzmetrics.com/gct-business-strategy/).
- Real recordings, project facts, public-safe screenshots, approved photos and attributable independent proof; permissions and dates.
- Current [Article Guidelines](https://localservicespotlight.com/article-guidelines/), the page’s role and its existing media, links and source/builder constraints.

## Steps

1. Read the actual page and mark unclear promises, unsupported outcomes, generic filler and a text-heavy first screen. Do not claim to detect AI authorship from writing style. The repair target is usefulness and evidence: identify the precise claim or explanation that needs better support.
2. Build a source file that ties each important claim to an actual record, scope, date and named subject. Separate observed results from estimates, examples and future plans. If the needed proof does not exist, narrow or remove the claim and assign the evidence gap instead of inventing a testimonial or number.
3. Choose the strongest relevant credible proof and explain what it establishes. E-E-A-T means experience, expertise, authoritativeness and trustworthiness; use the [owned SEO Tree guide](https://blitzmetrics.com/seo-tree/) for the site’s proof approach. A famous but unrelated name does not substitute for evidence of this page’s method.
4. Rewrite the opening in two or three grade-five sentences about the reader’s situation, useful outcome and how the page helps. Preserve the real author’s voice. Use first person for an authorized account of that person’s own work; attribute others’ words and never invent an “I did this” experience.
5. Improve the body with specific method, named examples, dates and measured results where actually supported. Retain valuable source material and strongest relevant endorsements with clear attribution, highest credible authority first. A neutral appearance remains an appearance and historic proof retains its date.
6. Replace generic illustrative filler with a meaningful real photo, source screenshot or evidence-backed diagram where it helps. Put a useful visual in the first screen, preserve rights and descriptive alt text, and keep relevant existing media. Do not manufacture a project scene or treat every useful diagram as a missing photograph.
7. Check the exact revised claims against their sources, then review the normal desktop/mobile page after authorized release. Save the before/after revision, quoted semantic review and remaining gaps. Pass any actual traffic or inquiry comparison to [Metrics, Analysis, Action: what happened, why and what to do](https://blitzmetrics.com/maa/); a more credible page is not by itself proof of a measured ranking lift.

## Definition of done (QA checklist)

Quality assurance (QA) means checking the actual result against its agreed requirements. Follow the [Article Guidelines](https://localservicespotlight.com/article-guidelines/).

- [ ] The page’s key promises are supported, narrowed or removed; no AI-authorship diagnosis or fictional result is asserted.
- [ ] Real voice, named examples, strongest relevant credibility and attribution remain clear.
- [ ] The opening and meaningful lead visual help the reader, and actual source and rendered checks are recorded.
- [ ] The exact output, source revision, reviewer evidence and remaining owner action are saved.
- [ ] For any reader-facing output, the short grade-five opening states the reader’s useful outcome and supporting method or proof. The body delivers that promise; a useful authentic visual appears in the first screen. Retain exact text and quoted reviewer evidence.

## Example(s)

**Fictional teaching example. This is not a client result or proof of a completed run.**

A fictional builder’s page says it is “the best” without proof. The source file has a real project photo and a customer’s approved comment about meeting a deadline. The rewrite explains that specific job and links its method. It does not turn one comment into a claim of being the top builder or invent a revenue gain.

## Handoff and Content Factory context

[Improve the existing owning page](https://local-service-spotlight.github.io/task-library/?task=enhance-existing-articles-before-creating-new-ones#task-enhance-existing-articles-before-creating-new-ones) receives related hub improvements; [Review the opening and context](https://local-service-spotlight.github.io/task-library/?task=step-7-write-hook-and-establish-context#task-step-7-write-hook-and-establish-context) receives exact opening text and evidence. The page owner gets the reviewed source and remaining proof gaps; [Measure the accepted change set](https://local-service-spotlight.github.io/task-library/?task=step-6-measure-and-iterate-with-maa#task-step-6-measure-and-iterate-with-maa) receives only actual released changes.

This task supports the [Content Factory: Produce, Process, Post and Promote](https://blitzmetrics.com/content-factory/). Identity, proof, access or coordination can support several stages. Use the real inputs and receiving owner above; this task does not create unrelated transcripts, clips or ads merely because the diagram has four stages.

## Start with an agent

Give the [AI worker](https://blitzmetrics.com/build-agents/) this recipe, the real inputs, desired result and actions already authorized. Ask for the saved output, sources, checks and next owner. A [skill is a written recipe](https://localservicespotlight.com/plugin/); loading one does not prove account access or perform the task. Use the [installation guide](https://localservicespotlight.com/install/) if reusable setup is needed. A ZIP is a source snapshot, not an access grant or automatic update.

Use the app’s actual supported tools and verified file/account access. Keep a missing human verification step with its real owner. Recurring work needs its own configured job, trigger, timezone and observed result; this guide creates no schedule. Before any media playback, mute the player and set its volume to zero. If silence cannot be verified first, use captions, frames, metadata or another silent check.

## Record the real execution

Open the run record when work begins. Keep one execution ID, starting recipe revision, real inputs and current state. Write the [meta article, the record of this execution](https://blitzmetrics.com/meta-article-prompt/) with actual steps, results, checks, failures and next owner. Writing is required; public release follows existing authority. Link it to this recipe and the [Task Library](https://local-service-spotlight.github.io/task-library/).

Reuse the same execution ID for internal checks, revisions, retries and meta writing. A blocked run stays open with its dependency and owner, without an invented finish time. Dated public examples and distinct verified execution counts remain separate. Propose the smallest source-backed recipe improvement when the actual evidence reveals a defect.


<!-- factory-layer:start -->

## Factory chain (do not treat this as isolated)

- **Phase:** —
- **Importance:** 3/5 `●●●○○` — frequency 3, revenue 3, gating 2 (supporting)
- **Suggested previous station:** —
- **Suggested next station:** —
These stations are generated neighbors, not verified prerequisites or handoffs. Follow the task’s actual Inputs and Handoff sections.
- **Handoff:** Save this task’s actual output, source, date and checks where the receiving owner can read them. Follow the Inputs and Handoff sections for its next step.

## Model routing (same factory, any engine)

- **This task's lane:** `any` — Any capable chat model (Claude, ChatGPT, Grok, Gemini). SOP following, drafts, checklists.
- **Single-engine path:** Use the capable AI app you already have. Check its required tools and access before starting. Pass the actual result and proof to the next task.
- **Optional multi-engine:** A tested local model may draft; a stronger model may review facts and voice. Use supported tools for approved actions. Pick models from observed quality and cost; a model name does not prove it can run this task.
- **Never** store the working state in one vendor's memory. Files in the Content Library are the bridge.

<!-- factory-layer:end -->
## Definitive article & links

- [Maintained source guide](https://blitzmetrics.com/seo-tree/)
- [This task in the Task Library](https://local-service-spotlight.github.io/task-library/?task=replace-ai-looking-content-with-real-eeat#task-replace-ai-looking-content-with-real-eeat)
- [Article Guidelines](https://localservicespotlight.com/article-guidelines/)
- [Definitive article and task recipe standard](https://blitzmetrics.com/definitive-article-guide/)
- [How recipes and run records fit together](https://localservicespotlight.com/meta-articles/)

### Primary method references

- [Google’s people-first content guidance](https://developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/creating-helpful-content)

## Review and evidence still needed

The inherited contributor status is `needs-work`. It is preserved, not promoted by this rewrite. That label alone does not prove document readiness, account access, an actual execution or a client result.

The fictional example teaches the method and does not fill a real-run evidence gap. A named semantic reviewer must check the actual opening, full method, sources and handoff. Check the useful opening visual in the normal rendered guide at the current required desktop and mobile sizes, including 1280 × 800 and 390 × 844. Source readability checks do not prove public presentation or task execution.