SiteAuditLint did not start as a plan to build an SEO software company. It started with a problem I kept running into as a freelancer.
I needed an SEO crawler I could use without constantly worrying about crawl limits. Free versions of desktop crawlers cap how many URLs you can check, and cloud audit tools ration pages by plan. When you work on client sites every week, you rarely know in advance whether a site has fifty pages or five thousand.
I wanted a tool where I could simply crawl the whole site and get the data I needed.
It Started With Python
At first, I used Python. It let me build exactly the checks I wanted: crawl pages, collect status codes, titles, meta descriptions, canonical tags and internal links, flag problems, and generate reports.
But there was another problem.
Running the crawl was only part of the work.
I remember one client site with about [3,000] URLs. I had fixed a batch of redirect chains and duplicate titles, and the client asked a simple question: "Is it fixed?" To answer, I had to rerun the scripts, wait for the crawl, then dig through folders to find the previous export and compare spreadsheets by hand.
Every recurring audit raised the same questions:
- Where did I save the previous crawl?
- Which report was from the last audit?
- Did that fix actually go live, or did it break something else?
- What changed since the last crawl?
The more often I repeated the process, the more tiring it became. A recurring SEO audit should not mean starting from zero every time.
Why Not Build the Tool I Needed?
I wanted to crawl a website, keep the results, make changes, crawl it again, and immediately see what improved.
Why not build the tool I actually need?
So I started building SiteAuditLint. The idea was simple at first: an SEO crawler that collects what I normally check during a technical SEO audit and makes the results easier to work with. As I used it, the idea grew.
A Crawl Should Be More Than a Report
A crawl should not just produce a huge list of URLs. It should tell me what needs attention, and every issue should explain why it matters and how to fix it.
A report also should not disappear once the audit is finished. When I crawl the same site again, I should be able to compare the new results with the old ones.
That became the heart of SiteAuditLint: audit history and crawl comparison.
After every recrawl, the comparison shows:
- Fixed issues: problems from the last audit that are now gone.
- Open issues: problems that are still there.
- New issues: SEO regressions introduced since the last crawl, like a template change that wiped out titles.
- Changed pages: URLs that switched status, such as indexable to noindex or 200 to 301.
That last category is the one that saves me most often. Fixing problems is only half the job. Catching the new ones before they cost traffic is the other half.
Crawl. Fix. Compare. Improve.
That changed the way I thought about SEO auditing. It was no longer just:
Crawl/Report/Fix
It became:
The goal was never to create another tool that throws hundreds of SEO warnings at you. I wanted something I could actually use in my daily work: a tool that replaces rerunning scripts, keeps every audit organized, shows exactly what changed between crawls, and gradually brings more of the checks I rely on into one place.
Why SiteAuditLint Exists
SiteAuditLint has grown far beyond the original Python scripts, but the reason I started it has stayed the same. I was tired of doing the same work over and over. I needed a better workflow for my own SEO work.
So I built one.
If you run recurring audits for clients or your own sites, I built this for you too.