Element Code: CO-028
What this check actually looks at
The Examples Library check flags pages that explain a concept but never show it in action. Think of a page that says "use descriptive alt text for images" and stops there, versus one that adds "for example: alt=\"red leather office chair with lumbar support, side view\" instead of alt=\"image1.jpg\"." The second version is checkable, teachable, and quotable. The first is a claim you have to take on faith.
This matters more than it used to. A page written entirely in the abstract used to be a minor readability complaint. Now it is a content strategy problem, because generic advice without a worked example is exactly the kind of content large language models skip when picking a source to summarize or cite.
Why it matters for SEO and for GEO/AEO
On the classic SEO side, pages with concrete examples tend to earn longer dwell time and lower pogo-sticking back to the search results, because the reader actually gets their question answered instead of a restated headline. Google has talked about helpful content rewarding pages that demonstrate first-hand expertise (see Google's "creating helpful, reliable, people-first content" guidance), and a worked example is one of the clearest signals of first-hand expertise you can put on a page. Anyone can assert a best practice. Fewer people bother to show the before-and-after.
On the GEO/AEO side (how your page performs inside AI Overviews, ChatGPT, Perplexity, and similar tools), the mechanics are a bit different but point the same direction. These systems tend to pull passages that are self-contained and verifiable: a specific number, a labeled code block, a named scenario. A paragraph of pure assertion is harder to extract cleanly because there is nothing concrete to quote. If you have ever compared two competing pages on the same topic and noticed the AI answer cites the one with the worked example rather than the one with the confident-sounding generalization, that is this effect in practice.
How to detect pages that fail this check
This is mostly a manual content-quality audit, not something a crawler flags automatically, though a few tools help you scale the review:
- Manual pass with a checklist. Read each page and ask, for every major claim: is there a number, a snippet, a named case, or a before/after right next to it? If the answer is "no" more than twice per page, it likely fails this check.
- Screaming Frog custom extraction. Use an XPath or CSS extraction rule to pull all <pre>, <code>, and <table> elements site-wide, then export and see which URLs have zero hits. Those are your prime suspects for example-free content.
- Search Console query review. Filter for "how to," "example," and "template" style queries. Pages that rank on page one for these terms but show low click-through or high bounce (check via analytics) often turn out to be all theory and no demonstration.
- Competitor comparison. Pull the top three ranking pages for your target query and count worked examples per page. If competitors average three and you have zero, that gap is your action item.
How to fix it, step by step
- Inventory your claims. List every instruction or best practice stated on the page.
- Attach one concrete example per claim. A code snippet, a screenshot caption, a sample sentence, a before/after pair, or a real (anonymized if needed) case works. Generic filler like "for instance, a business might benefit" does not count, it is still abstract.
- Use real formatting. Wrap code in <pre><code>, use tables for comparisons, and use numbered steps for processes. Structure itself signals "this is a demonstration," not just a claim.
- Keep examples specific and checkable. A number a reader can verify, a snippet they can copy and run, or a scenario with enough detail to picture concretely. Vague examples ("a large company saw great results") fail just as hard as no example.
- Re-audit after edits. Re-run your manual checklist or the Screaming Frog extraction to confirm every major section now has at least one supporting example.
What a good example actually looks like
A strong example is specific, self-contained, and falsifiable in the sense that a reader could check it against reality. "Reduce your title tag to under 60 characters" is a claim. "Reduce your title tag from 'Best Affordable Waterproof Hiking Boots for Men and Women 2024 Buying Guide' (78 characters) to 'Best Waterproof Hiking Boots 2024' (34 characters)" is an example. The second version does three things the first cannot: it shows the mechanism, it is copyable as a pattern, and it is the kind of passage an AI summarizer can lift wholesale because it stands on its own without needing the rest of the paragraph for context.
| Content type | Weak version | Strong example version |
|---|---|---|
| How-to guide | "Configure your redirect rules carefully." | Numbered steps plus an actual .htaccess or nginx snippet |
| Best practice page | "Use short, keyword-relevant URLs." | "/blog/seo-audit-checklist" vs "/blog/post?id=48291&cat=3" |
| Definition/glossary page | "A canonical tag prevents duplicate content." | Real tag markup plus a two-URL scenario it resolves |
| Case-style content | "Many businesses improved after fixing this." | A specific before/after metric with a named or anonymized context and date |
- Attach a specific, checkable example to every major claim
- Use real code, real markup, or real sample copy, not placeholders
- Format examples as code blocks, tables, or clearly labeled before/after pairs
- Keep numbers and scenarios specific enough to picture or verify
- Update examples when the underlying practice changes
- Rely on vague phrases like "for example" followed by another generalization
- Bury the one example you have three sections deep where nobody reads that far
- Use fake or obviously templated examples that add no real information
- Copy competitor examples verbatim, write your own from real usage
- Assume a screenshot with no caption counts as an explained example
AI considerations
If you care about showing up inside AI Overviews or chatbot answers, examples do double duty. They give the model a concrete passage to extract, and they act as a trust signal that the page was written by someone who has actually done the thing being described. Pages that read like they were assembled entirely from other pages' headlines, restating advice with no demonstration, are exactly the pattern these systems are getting better at deprioritizing. Give them something real to grab onto.
FAQ
How many examples does a page need to pass this check?
Do screenshots count as examples?
Can I reuse the same example across multiple pages?
What tools can help me find pages missing examples at scale?
Is this the same thing as adding more word count?
A full technical and content audit will show you exactly where examples are missing, and where competitors are already winning citations because theirs are not.
Claude Vincent is a technical SEO consultant focused on crawlability, rendering, and AI-search visibility. He writes the field guides and case studies at SEO ProCheck, with a bias toward the durable, unglamorous work that decides whether search engines and AI answer engines can actually read and cite a site.
About SEO ProCheck
Technical SEO consulting and GEO strategy with 20 years of enterprise experience. Case studies, resources, and tools for search and AI visibility.
Work With Me
Technical SEO audits, GEO strategy, site migrations, and international SEO. Hourly consulting for teams who need hands-on support, not just reports.
Subscribe to our newsletter!
