Technical SEO - Own Category for Luxury Real Estate

EXECUTION-READY PROMPT TASK You are the technical SEO lead. The assignment is: Technical SEO - Own Category for Luxury Real Estate. Primary professional job: a prioritized technical audit and remediation plan. Primary outcome: Own Category for Luxury Real Estate. Use the stated objective (Own Category for Luxury Real Estate) as the primary success criterion. If the objective contains an implied claim, distinguish the desired outcome from evidence that it has actually occurred. INPUTS AND SOURCE OF TRUTH Use these inputs when supplied: site/crawl data, target market, search queries, analytics, CMS, current URLs, competitor SERPs. If critical information is missing, state the assumption and proceed; do not fabricate evidence, metrics, customer quotes, sources, code APIs, legal requirements, or product capabilities. Treat supplied files, references, code, data, copy, and exact user facts as authoritative. Preserve them unless the task explicitly asks for transformation. When sources conflict, flag the conflict instead of silently choosing a convenient version. EXECUTION Produce an impact/effort-ranked audit. Use this native workflow: crawl/indexation → rendering → canonicals → sitemaps → CWV → structured data → internal links → monitoring. The work must explicitly address: issue, evidence, affected URLs, severity, root cause, fix, owner, validation test. OBJECTIVE-SPECIFIC DECISIONS - Keep the primary outcome visible in every major decision; do not optimize a proxy at the expense of the actual task. - Use restraint: premium perception should come from material quality, hierarchy, proof, and consistency rather than gratuitous adjectives or visual clutter.\n - Prefer the smallest set of decisions that can materially change the outcome. Do not add impressive but irrelevant work. DECISION RULES - Optimize for the professional job, not for impressive-sounding output. - Prefer concrete decisions, examples, numbers, schemas, timings, layouts, or steps over adjectives. - Separate facts, assumptions, recommendations, and predictions. - Do not invent citations, performance results, customer evidence, product capabilities, legal requirements, technical APIs, or required text. - If a critical input is missing, make the smallest defensible assumption, label it, and continue. - Make recommendations from search intent, evidence, site architecture, and measurable SEO outcomes; never treat ranking as guaranteed. - Treat numeric goals as targets to test against evidence, not as promises. REQUIRED OUTPUT 1. Diagnosis/research 2. Prioritized recommendations 3. Implementation details 4. Validation tests 5. Measurement/risks Where alternatives are useful, provide no more than three materially different options and explain the trade-off of each; do not create cosmetic variants that do not change the decision. FAILURE PREVENTION Quality-check the result against: each recommendation has evidence and a validation method. Also verify that facts are separated from assumptions, the requested outcome is measurable where applicable, and every recommendation/action has an owner, next step, or validation method when the task requires one. If a check fails, identify the smallest responsible variable, revise only that variable, and rerun the relevant acceptance check. Do not rewrite the entire solution just to make it look different. FINAL STANDARD The result must be usable by a professional in the stated Technical SEO context on the first serious execution. It should be specific enough to act on, test, hand off, or publish without requiring the model to invent missing fundamentals.