Content Decay Analyst
Finds the pages that used to work, and why they stopped
9 pages lost 5,855 clicks (35% of the total), and lost share is the biggest cause.
14 pages: clicks -33.5% (16,640 to 11,065). 9 pages fell 20% or more.
Lost ranking: 1,970 clicks across 3 pages. Lost demand: 1,880 across 2. Lost share of clicks at steady rank: 2,005 across 4.
/guides/tax-year-checklist lost 1,650 clicks (-53.2%): Lost demand (-54.4%).
The page content itself is not in the data; the cause is read from clicks, impressions and position only. Seasonal pages can look like decay.
Clicks lost by cause
- Lost ranking34%
- Lost demand32%
- Lost share34%
Largest losses
- /guides/tax-year-checklist1,650
- /guides/crm-setup1,150
- /blog/invoice-templates950
- /compare/tool-a-vs-tool-b680
- /blog/pricing-models500
- /blog/remote-onboarding350
- /blog/okr-examples320
- /blog/security-checklist230
Decaying pages
| Page | Clicks | Position | Impressions | CTR | Cause |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| /guides/tax-year-checklist | -53.2% | +0.1 | -54.4% | 2.7% | Lost demand |
| /guides/crm-setup | -47.9% | +3.2 | -14.8% | -38.9% | Lost ranking |
| /blog/invoice-templates | -45.2% | +0.1 | -5.4% | -42.1% | Lost share |
| /compare/tool-a-vs-tool-b | -45.3% | +0.1 | -3.3% | -43.4% | Lost share |
| /blog/pricing-models | -27.8% | +1.8 | -8.3% | -21.2% | Lost ranking |
| /blog/remote-onboarding | -36.8% | +0.2 | -4.5% | -33.8% | Lost share |
| /blog/okr-examples | -36.4% | +1.9 | -10.4% | -29% | Lost ranking |
| /blog/security-checklist | -35.9% | +0.1 | -32.4% | -5.3% | Lost demand |
| /blog/changelog-roundup | -41.7% | +0.4 | -9.4% | -35.6% | Lost share |
What to do this week
- Refresh the 3 pages that lost ranking, starting with /guides/crm-setup: position fell 3.2 places.
- Rewrite titles and descriptions on /blog/invoice-templates, /compare/tool-a-vs-tool-b: rank held but CTR fell, so the results page has changed around them.
- Don't refresh /guides/tax-year-checklist, /blog/security-checklist: impressions fell with demand, so check the season before spending effort.
Do
- Fix the ranking losses first: they are where a page refresh can win clicks back.
Don't
- Don't treat every decline as decay: demand falls have nothing to refresh.
How to improve
- Add the date of each page's last update so the next report can test whether freshness explains the loss.
- Add conversions per page so the next report can rank decay by value, not clicks.
Demo
Overview
Content teams are measured on publishing, so they publish. Almost nobody is measured on the library, and a library decays: a page that ranked and converted two years ago slowly stops doing either. The decline is gradual enough that no alert fires, and the site total stays flat because new pages replace what old ones lose. The site looks stable while the library rots underneath it.
That is the expensive part, because updating a page that already has authority costs a fraction of what a new page costs to rank, and it works faster.
The distinction that makes this actionable is why a page declined. A page whose whole topic lost interest is not worth updating — the demand went away. A page holding position while the topic grows is losing share to something better. A page that fell after a site change did not decay, it broke. A page still ranking and no longer converting has a page problem, not a traffic problem. Four causes, four responses, and a traffic chart shows the same downward line for all of them.
There is also usually a pile of pages competing for the same query, written years apart by people who did not know the others existed.
This agent reports each cause with the evidence and ranks by recoverable value. It publishes and edits nothing.
Benefits
Traffic recovered cheaply
The pages already have the authority a new page has to earn.
Effort spent where it pays
Rather than on a topic whose demand has gone.
Cannibalisation resolved
Which usually lifts several pages at once.
What it does
Separates lost demand from lost share
A topic nobody searches for any more is not worth updating. A page losing to something better is. The chart looks identical.
Catches the break, not the decay
A page that fell the week of a site change did not decay. It broke, and that is a different team's fix.
Finds pages that rank and no longer convert
A page problem wearing a traffic problem's clothes.
Finds pages competing with each other
Written years apart by people who did not know the others existed, splitting one page's authority.
Ranks by recoverable value
Updating a page with authority costs a fraction of ranking a new one, and works faster.
Publishes nothing
It never edits, rewrites or publishes a page. Generated updates are how a library gets worse.
What this changes
What this changes about your week
- It takes over
- Finding which pages stopped working and why.
- Done today by
- Nobody. Teams are measured on publishing, not on the library.
- How often
- Never — the total stays flat while the library rots underneath.
- Typical manual effort
- Each decline needs its cause separated: lost demand, lost share, a break, or a conversion problem.
Why Content in particular. Updating a page that already has authority costs a fraction of ranking a new one. But a traffic chart shows the same downward line for four causes, and only two are worth acting on.
Runs unattended
Started by you or by an event, and it finishes on its own. Nothing waits for someone to be at a desk.
The same standard every time
The two-hundredth item is held to the bar the first one was. Consistency is the part people cannot sustain.
It cannot act on its own
Content Decay Analyst has no path to sending, spending or committing. That limit is why its output is safe to act on.
How it runs
This agent runs server-side through the PROMIVO runtime. Each run is logged step by step and every tool call is permission-checked before it executes.
- 1InputValidated against the agent input schema
- 2Modelclaude-sonnet-5 with automatic fallback
- 3Toolsextract_structured_data
- 4PermissionsRuns READ actions automatically; anything higher waits for approval
- 5OutputStructured result matching the output schema
- 6LoggingTokens, duration and every step recorded
Requirements
Integrations
No integrations required.
Before you start
- Page-level traffic, ranking and conversion history
- Search demand per topic over the same period, where available
- Publish and update dates per page
- Dates of site changes or migrations
- Requires the All-Access plan or higher
Use cases
Quarterly content review
What decayed, why, and what is worth recovering.
Flat traffic with steady publishing
The classic sign that new pages are replacing lost ones.
After a site migration
Which declines are breaks rather than decay.
Planning a content quarter
Updates ranked against new pages on cost to recover.
Pricing
All-Access
Billed monthly through your PROMIVO subscription. Cancel at any time.
Runs consume your plan allowance for agent executions and tokens. See plan limits
FAQ
Will it rewrite the pages?
No. It never edits or publishes anything. Generated replacement content is how a library gets worse — the pages worth recovering are worth a person's attention.
How does it know demand fell rather than ranking?
By comparing the page's own trend against the topic's search demand over the same period. Where demand data is not supplied it says the two cannot be separated rather than guessing.
Does it do keyword research?
No. It works from your own analytics and search data, on pages you already have. It is about the library, not about finding new topics.
Reviews
Reviews open once customers have run this agent.
Need this agent to work differently?
Tell us what to change and our team will scope a customised version for your business.
Customize this agent