SEO · Content planning
The Best Prompt for a Content Refresh
The best prompt for a content refresh starts by asking whether the page should be updated at all. This prompt takes the existing page, its publish date, the target query, any performance data and the changes you know about, then gives a verdict (refresh, rewrite, consolidate or leave) and a section-by-section plan. Time-sensitive claims are marked for you to verify, because the model cannot confirm what is current.
Content Refresh Prompt
Audits an existing page section by section, decides whether to refresh, rewrite, merge or leave it, and lists what to keep, update, cut, add and verify.
- Works with
- ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity
- Difficulty
- Intermediate
- Complexity
- Conversation
- Variables
- 6
- Version
- 1.0
Customize this prompt
Fill in what you know. Anything left blank stays as a [bracketed placeholder]. Nothing you type leaves your browser.
6 variables · fields marked * matter most
I want to update an existing page. Act as a senior content editor with SEO experience. Your job is to decide how much work this page needs and give me an edit plan, not to rewrite it yet. PAGE DETAILS - URL: [Page URL] - Target query and reader: [Target query and reader] - First published / last substantially updated: [Published and last updated] - What I know has changed since then (product, prices, rules, tools, our own view): [What has changed since] <performance_data> [Performance data] </performance_data> <current_page> [Current page content] </current_page> IMPORTANT LIMIT You cannot check today's facts. Your knowledge has a cutoff and may itself be out of date. Use known_changes as the authority on what is current. For everything else that could have changed, flag it; do not correct it from memory. WORK THROUGH THIS 1. Verdict. Choose one and justify it in three sentences: LIGHT REFRESH (sound page, dated details), SUBSTANTIAL REWRITE (structure or intent no longer fits), CONSOLIDATE (overlaps another page I mentioned; should be merged and redirected), or LEAVE (nothing material to change). Use performance_data if supplied; if it is empty, say the verdict rests on the content alone. 2. Section audit. For every heading in current_page, assign KEEP, UPDATE, CUT or MOVE, with a one-line reason. 3. Verification list. Quote each time-sensitive statement: dates, prices, versions, statistics, regulations, named tools, screenshots described, 'this year' phrasing. Mark each [VERIFY] and say what kind of source would settle it. 4. Additions. New sections or passages the reader now needs, each with what it should cover and where it goes. Mark required facts [ADD: ...]. 5. Queries. If performance_data lists queries, name those the page receives impressions for but does not answer well. 6. Housekeeping. Keep the URL unless consolidating. Say whether the title, H1, meta description, internal links and any structured data dates will need to change as a result of the edits. RULES - Do not invent replacement facts, figures or dates. - Do not recommend changing the published or updated date unless the edits are substantial; a new date on unchanged content misleads readers. - Do not add length for its own sake. Cutting is a valid recommendation. - No promises about regained rankings or traffic. RETURN Verdict, then a table (Section | Action | Reason | What to change), then the verification list, additions, query gaps, housekeeping, and finally an ordered checklist of edits. Ask me before drafting any new copy.
Use it when you are
- Updating an older guide whose clicks have declined in Search Console
- Running an annual review of evergreen articles
- Deciding whether two overlapping posts should be merged
- Preparing an edit plan for a writer taking over someone else's page
Why this prompt works
Leave is an allowed verdict
A prompt that asks how to improve a page always finds improvements. Offering four outcomes, including doing nothing and merging, makes the model weigh the scale of the problem first. That protects sound pages from churn and catches cases where polishing one of two overlapping articles would be wasted effort.
The model's own staleness is stated
Refreshing content with a model whose knowledge stops at a cutoff risks replacing old errors with slightly newer ones. The limit section names this, makes your known changes the authority, and routes everything else to a verification list where each item is quoted and paired with the kind of source that would settle it.
Every section gets one of four actions
KEEP, UPDATE, CUT and MOVE give a writer an unambiguous plan and make cutting as legitimate as adding. Tied to the rule against adding length for its own sake, this counters the habit of treating a refresh as a reason to make the page longer.
Dates follow the edits, not the other way round
Changing a date without changing the content is a freshness signal the page has not earned, and Google's guidance on helpful content questions that practice. The rule ties any date change to substantial edits, and the housekeeping step covers the title, links and markup that should move with it.
Planning and drafting are separate turns
The prompt stops at an ordered checklist and asks before writing copy. You verify the flagged facts in between, so new text is drafted from confirmed information instead of from the same outdated page the model has just audited or from its own memory.
How to use it
- Paste the full page with headings marked, and give the original publish date and the last meaningful update.
- Write down what you already know has changed, including overlapping pages on your site.
- Export the page's Search Console queries with clicks, impressions and position for a recent period and a comparison period, and paste them in.
- Read the verdict first. If it says consolidate or leave, decide on that before looking at the section plan.
- Work through the verification list with primary sources and record the confirmed facts.
- Reply with those facts and ask for drafts of the sections marked UPDATE and the additions, then edit them in your own voice.
AI model compatibility
| Model | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| ChatGPT | Expected to work | The prompt ends by asking before drafting copy. Reply with the sections you want written and the verified facts for each. |
| Claude | Expected to work | Paste the page with heading levels marked inside the current_page tags so the section audit can follow your structure. |
| Gemini | Expected to work | No model-specific adjustment needed. Paste the prompt as written. |
| Perplexity | Expected to work | A search-connected tool can help you work through the verification list afterward. Check each cited source yourself before changing the page. |
“Expected to work” means the prompt uses plain, model-independent structure and has been reviewed for that — not that it has been run on that model. A model is marked Tested only when a test record is published below.
Worked example
Scenario: An illustrative case: an HR software blog reviewing an onboarding checklist that has slipped in search over the past year.
I want to update an existing page. Act as a senior content editor with SEO experience. Your job is to decide how much work this page needs and give me an edit plan, not to rewrite it yet. PAGE DETAILS - URL: https://example.com/blog/remote-onboarding-checklist/ - Target query and reader: remote employee onboarding checklist; HR managers at small companies - First published / last substantially updated: Published May 2022, minor edit January 2023 - What I know has changed since then (product, prices, rules, tools, our own view): Two tools recommended in the post have been discontinued. We published a separate post at /blog/onboarding-first-week/ that covers similar ground. <performance_data> Search Console export for the URL: top queries with clicks, impressions and position for the last 3 months against the same period a year earlier </performance_data> <current_page> Full article pasted with headings: introduction, before day one, first day, first week, tools we recommend, a statistics section, conclusion </current_page> IMPORTANT LIMIT You cannot check today's facts. Your knowledge has a cutoff and may itself be out of date. Use known_changes as the authority on what is current. For everything else that could have changed, flag it; do not correct it from memory. WORK THROUGH THIS 1. Verdict. Choose one and justify it in three sentences: LIGHT REFRESH (sound page, dated details), SUBSTANTIAL REWRITE (structure or intent no longer fits), CONSOLIDATE (overlaps another page I mentioned; should be merged and redirected), or LEAVE (nothing material to change). Use performance_data if supplied; if it is empty, say the verdict rests on the content alone. 2. Section audit. For every heading in current_page, assign KEEP, UPDATE, CUT or MOVE, with a one-line reason. 3. Verification list. Quote each time-sensitive statement: dates, prices, versions, statistics, regulations, named tools, screenshots described, 'this year' phrasing. Mark each [VERIFY] and say what kind of source would settle it. 4. Additions. New sections or passages the reader now needs, each with what it should cover and where it goes. Mark required facts [ADD: ...]. 5. Queries. If performance_data lists queries, name those the page receives impressions for but does not answer well. 6. Housekeeping. Keep the URL unless consolidating. Say whether the title, H1, meta description, internal links and any structured data dates will need to change as a result of the edits. RULES - Do not invent replacement facts, figures or dates. - Do not recommend changing the published or updated date unless the edits are substantial; a new date on unchanged content misleads readers. - Do not add length for its own sake. Cutting is a valid recommendation. - No promises about regained rankings or traffic. RETURN Verdict, then a table (Section | Action | Reason | What to change), then the verification list, additions, query gaps, housekeeping, and finally an ordered checklist of edits. Ask me before drafting any new copy.
What a good response should contain
- A verdict that weighs a substantial rewrite against consolidating with the first-week post, justified from the supplied data
- A section table marking the tools section UPDATE and questioning whether the first-week section should MOVE to the other post
- A verification list quoting each statistic and tool mention with [VERIFY] and the type of source needed
- Query gaps drawn only from the pasted Search Console rows
- A closing question asking which sections to draft once facts are confirmed
This is an illustrative scenario showing how to fill in the prompt and what to look for. It is not a recorded model output. Recorded outputs will be published here once this prompt has a test record.
Testing and editorial review
Status: Untested. Reviewed for structure and clarity by the editorial team. No recorded model test yet.
No test record has been published for this prompt yet. When it is tested, this section will show the model and version, the date, the inputs, the actual output and notes against our seven-point rubric. We do not publish numerical scores.
| Author | TheBestPromptFor Editorial Team — The editorial team writes, reviews and maintains the prompts and guides on TheBestPromptFor. Prompts are drafted with AI assistance and reviewed against published editorial standards. |
|---|---|
| Published | November 15, 2026 |
| Last reviewed | November 15, 2026 |
| Last tested | Not yet tested |
| Version history |
|
Limitations and things to check
- The model cannot confirm current facts. Every [VERIFY] item needs checking against a primary source.
- It only knows about overlapping pages you mention, so consolidation advice is limited to those.
- Performance analysis is restricted to the rows you paste and cannot explain causes outside the page, such as changes in search results.
- Updating a page does not guarantee that lost rankings or traffic return.
Alternative prompts
SEO
On-Page SEO Review Prompt
Reviews one existing page against its target query and returns specific before-and-after edits to the title, headings, opening, coverage, links and images.
- ChatGPT
- Claude
- Gemini
SEO
SEO Content Brief Prompt
Produces a writer-ready brief: reader intent, the angle only you can offer, a purposeful outline, evidence to gather and clear acceptance criteria.
- ChatGPT
- Claude
- Gemini
- Perplexity
Content Writing
Editing and Proofreading Prompt
Edits a draft at the level you choose, protects the author's voice, and returns a change log plus queries instead of silent rewrites.
- ChatGPT
- Claude
- Gemini
SEO
Title Tag and Meta Description Prompt
Writes unique, accurate title tags and meta descriptions for a batch of pages, with options, character counts and a check against what each page says.
- ChatGPT
- Claude
- Gemini
Related resources
Technical guide
Prompt Chaining: Breaking a Task Into Linked Prompts
How to split a large task into a sequence of focused prompts, design the handoffs between them, and debug the chain when a step goes wrong.
Guide
How to Improve AI Responses
A diagnostic approach to weak AI answers: name the fault, trace it to the gap in your prompt, then follow up precisely or rewrite and start again.
Frequently asked questions
Should I change the publish date when I refresh a page?
Update the date when the content has changed in substance, and make the visible date match any date in your structured data. Changing a date on essentially unchanged content to appear fresh misleads readers, and Google's helpful content guidance flags that practice as a warning sign.
Should I keep the same URL?
In most cases, yes. The URL carries the page's history and existing links. Change it only when consolidating pages, and then redirect the retired URL to the page that replaces it.
How do I choose which pages to refresh first?
Start with pages that matter to the business and show declining clicks or impressions in Search Console, or that you know contain outdated information. This prompt handles one page at a time, so a short ranked list is enough to begin.
Sources and references
- Creating helpful, reliable, people-first content — Google Search Central
- SEO Starter Guide — Google Search Central
Was this prompt useful?
No account needed. Do not include personal information.