Every SEO scope is shaped by the same set of inputs. The problem is that most agencies process these inputs in someone's head rather than in a system.
A senior person looks at a brief, considers site size, checks the CMS, thinks about what the client mentioned about content, and assembles a scope based on experience. This works — until that person is unavailable, overloaded, or trying to delegate.
When inputs are explicit, you can assemble scopes instead of rebuilding them. This page lists the 10 variables that drive SEO scope decisions and explains what each one changes.
Who this is for
- Agency founders encoding their scoping knowledge into a repeatable system
- Account managers who need a structured way to determine scope
- Teams standardising scope inputs across multiple people
- Anyone building SEO scope templates that adapt to different engagements
Variables that change SEO deliverables
1. Engagement type
| Type | What it changes |
|---|---|
| Audit only | Standalone deliverable, no implementation, clear end date |
| Audit + implementation | Audit phase followed by execution — needs phased timeline |
| Ongoing retainer | Monthly deliverables, hour allocation, change request process |
| Project-based | Fixed scope, fixed timeline, fixed fee |
This is the most fundamental variable. It determines document structure, pricing model, and which sections exist at all.
2. Site size
| Size | Typical impact |
|---|---|
| Under 500 pages | Standard audit, manageable on-page scope |
| 500–5,000 pages | Prioritisation required, template-based approach |
| 5,000–50,000 pages | Crawl budgets matter, automated analysis, larger hours |
| 50,000+ pages | Enterprise approach, segment-based strategy, dedicated resources |
3. CMS / platform
WordPress, Shopify, custom CMS, headless — each has different technical constraints, implementation approaches, and common issues. Platform determines which technical recommendations are feasible.
4. Markets and languages
Single-market is straightforward. Multi-market adds hreflang, localised content, market-specific rankings, and expanded reporting. Each additional market multiplies certain deliverables.
5. Content production
Three options, each with different scope implications:
- Agency produces content — briefs, writing, editing, and publishing in scope
- Client produces content — agency provides briefs and strategy only
- Content excluded — strategy and optimisation of existing content only
6. Local SEO
If local is included: GBP management, citation work, local content, review management, per-location reporting. If not: explicitly excluded. See: Local SEO Scope Template →
7. Link building
Three distinct approaches:
- Included — outreach, digital PR, content-led link acquisition
- Excluded — explicitly not part of scope (most common)
- Separate scope — link building as a standalone engagement
If included, define method and explicitly exclude paid links and PBN activity.
8. Reporting cadence
Monthly reporting is standard. Quarterly strategy reviews add strategic depth. Weekly reporting is rare but some enterprise clients require it. Each cadence level changes deliverable hours. See: Reporting Scope Template →
9. Access readiness
How quickly the client can provide GA4, GSC, CMS, and staging access directly affects timeline. "Access provided within 5 business days" is an assumption. "Access delayed by 3 weeks" changes the project plan.
10. Stakeholder approval speed
How fast the client approves content, strategy, and recommendations determines real timeline vs planned timeline. Slow approvals are the most common cause of SEO engagement delays.
Use this during or after discovery to capture the inputs that drive scope decisions.
- Engagement type: Audit only / Audit + implementation / Retainer / Project
- Site URL: ___
- Approximate page count: Under 500 / 500–5K / 5K–50K / 50K+
- CMS / platform: WordPress / Shopify / Custom / Other: ___
- Markets: Single / Multi (list): ___
- Languages: Single / Multi (list): ___
- Content production: Agency writes / Client writes / Excluded
- Local SEO: Yes (locations: ___) / No
- Link building: Included / Excluded / Separate scope
- Reporting cadence: Monthly / Monthly + quarterly / Weekly
- GA4 access available: Yes / No / Unknown
- GSC access available: Yes / No / Unknown
- CMS access available: Yes / No / Unknown
- Decision-maker approval speed: Fast (1–2 days) / Moderate (3–5 days) / Slow (1+ week)
How RuleDox helps
These 10 variables are exactly the inputs RuleDox uses to assemble SEO scopes:
- Set the variables — engagement type, site size, content scope, local SEO, etc.
- Rules determine sections — audit-only scopes exclude implementation deliverables automatically
- Hours calculate from inputs — a 500-page site gets different hours than a 50,000-page site
- Exclusions match selections — if link building is set to "excluded," the exclusion language appears
The result is a Google Doc with the right deliverables, the right exclusions, and the right hours — assembled from your rules, not from memory.
FAQ
Do I need all 10 variables for every scope? No. Some variables have default values (e.g., most scopes are single-market, most exclude link building). The value of the list is that you never miss a variable that turns out to matter — not that every variable is always relevant.
What if the client can't answer a variable during intake? Flag it as an assumption. "Scope assumes single-market engagement. Multi-market work would require a scope adjustment." This protects you without blocking the scoping process.
How do I handle variables that change mid-engagement? The change request process in your scope should cover this. When a variable changes (new locations, additional markets, content scope expansion), it triggers a scope review — not automatic inclusion.