G2 — Chapter 7 - Technical SEO

Criterion G2 : Core Web Vitals - INP — guide + checklist

PART 1 - Fundamentals Chapter 7 - Technical SEO Keyword : core web vitals - inp

We often see this error on mass-generated sites.

The criterion **G2 — Core Web Vitals - INP** is part of our SEO checklist (335 criteria). Here, you have a **practical** method to check and fix it — with a concrete example.

What exactly this criterion covers

We often see this error on mass-generated sites.

**G2 — Core Web Vitals - INP** (Chapter 7 - Technical SEO): Interaction to Next Paint < 200ms (replaces FID since March 2024)

Why it matters (SEO + UX)

Why it matters: it is a lever for CTR and perception in SERP. When poorly applied, we often observe: ambiguity (wrong associated query), duplication between pages, or loss of performance on loading time.

On volume-generated sites, this criterion also serves as a **safeguard**: a stable rule prevents 1,000 errors at once.

How to check (step by step)

Approach: check by crawl (list + export). Recommended tool: **Lighthouse**.

  1. Open the page in Chrome → DevTools → Performance/Network tab.
  2. Run WebPageTest and note the main weak point.
  3. Check if the problem repeats on “money” pages.

Tip: first isolate 10 “representative” URLs (top pages + generated pages) before scaling the fix.

How to fix properly

Strategy: apply a rule, then check neighboring pages.

  • Fix the biggest cost source (images, JS, fonts, cache).
  • Retest, then apply to the template (not page by page).
  • Add a safeguard: weight budget (KB) and CI check if possible.

Then: re-crawl 50–200 URLs, then monitor Search Console for 7–14 days (impressions/CTR/indexing).

Concrete example (illustrative)

Example (illustrative):

  • **Context**: local page for law firm in Sfax
  • **Before**: Lighthouse: 38/100 (heavy JS, unoptimized images).
  • **After**: Lighthouse: 92/100 (lazy-load, compression, cache).
  • **Note**: Goal: stabilize CLS.

Checklist to tick

  • [ ] Measure before/after
  • [ ] Improvement on template
  • [ ] No CWV regression
  • [ ] Cache and compression OK
FAQ

Frequently asked questions — G2

What is the most common mistake on “Core Web Vitals - INP”?

Fixing an isolated page without fixing the template/import: the mistake returns with the next generation.

What tool is the fastest to check at scale?

For this type of criterion, a crawl (e.g. Screaming Frog) + targeted verification in Lighthouse is generally the fastest combo.

How to prevent this from recurring on 10K generated pages?

Freeze an auto-generation rule (title/structure/schema/URLs) + add automatic control (crawl or test) before production import.

Ready to go from theory to action?

Validate this criterion with an audit, then deepen the method in the Academy.

Audit with the tool → Learn in the Academy →