A consolidated, ready-to-load specification for technical science writing — covering EEAT, compliance red lines, AI-citation remediation, and HTML/structured-data delivery.


About EEAT · Compliance Red Lines · Citability Remediation · HTML Delivery Standards

Purpose of this page: A single, directly loadable specification that merges four requirements for technical science content in the testing and inspection field — writing, compliance, SEO/AI citability, and HTML delivery. In a future conversation, paste this page URL to load the complete context at once.

One-line principle: Make no promises about results; state only facts and their conditions of applicability.

Key points:

1. Word count ≥1,500; primary-keyword density 2%–5%; each section ≥280 characters (hard thresholds — failure on any one is a fail).
2. Heading levels H1→H2→H3→H4 must be strictly consecutive; exactly one H1 per page; core blocks use question-form headings.
3. Answer-first: open each section with 1–2 sentences stating the answer; each section carries the full citation trio (named source + outbound link + attributed quote).
4. Zero hits on forbidden words: absolutist, exaggerating, and promise-style language are all replaced; reverse promises are forbidden too.
5. Brand names, external images, calls to engagement, and sensitive national-institution terms must all be zero; standard numbers and versions are verified item by item.

1. The Four EEAT Criteria

EEAT (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trust) is the common foundation for content-quality evaluation and for how large-language-model retrieval selects sources. All four criteria must be implemented together.

Criterion Implementation requirement
Experience Describe concrete testing scenarios, procedures, and frequently asked questions, demonstrating hands-on operational experience rather than generic filler.
Expertise Use accurate terminology; cite standards correctly (standard number + name); give sources for data; explain the principles behind the methods.
Authoritativeness Rely on public regulatory channels, national standards, and public industry information; state the information source and update date.
Trust No exaggeration, no absolute guarantees; explicitly state “subject to current standards and valid qualifications”; preserve uncertainty where it exists.

2. Compliance Red Lines (per the Advertising Law and the Provisions on the Governance of Network Information Content Ecology)

2.1 Absolutist and exaggerating expressions

The following words and phrases are replaced or removed wherever they describe testing capability, an organization, or a report.

Forbidden / risky expression Compliant replacement
authoritative / authoritative organization / authoritative certification professional / holds the corresponding qualifications / an organization that has passed the relevant assessment
most authoritative / strongest / highest / best / largest remove “most”, or use limited expressions such as “relatively” or “among the higher levels”
first-class / top-tier / leading / front-rank professional / has the corresponding capability
only / the only one recognized remove, or use “one of the few organizations that hold the … qualification”
100% / guaranteed based on data / sampling pass rate / per the test results
official endorsement / official seal / ironclad proof neutrally describe it as “issued by an organization whose qualification has been recognized”
Note: phrases such as “step one”, “maximum sound level Lmax”, and “peak highest” retain their normal semantic meaning as sequence markers or parameter names, and are not forbidden words — keep them.

2.2 Effect and outcome of reports: neutral, non-committal

The role of a CNAS/CMA report must be stated in neutral, non-committal terms. Never promise “legal effect”, “certainly accepted”, or that “international mutual recognition means it is valid”.

Do not write Write this instead
The report can be used directly for judicial, arbitration, or regulatory purposes. The use of the report is determined by the relevant laws and regulations, regulatory requirements, and the specific purpose.
The report is internationally mutually recognized. The laboratory’s competence has been assessed under the corresponding accreditation system; the applicability of the report in different countries or regions is governed by local regulatory requirements.
The report will certainly be accepted / has been accepted. Whether it is adopted is a judgment made by the relevant parties and the applicable regulations.
The strongest legal effect / validity plus mutual recognition combined. Provided the qualifications and procedures are met, the applicability of the report must be assessed against its specific purpose.
A CMA report amounts to official endorsement. CMA indicates that the organization has obtained qualification recognition; the applicability of the report is governed by the regulations.
We guarantee the report will be valid. It is recommended to verify the organization’s qualifications and the scope of its accredited items before commissioning.
Principle: never promise an outcome; state only the facts and the conditions under which they apply.

2.3 Reverse promises are also outcome promises

“Promising that something cannot be done” is the same kind of outcome promise as “promising that something can be done”. Both are forbidden.

Counter-example: “It does not guarantee that the root cause will be found 100% of the time”, “we cannot promise that the problem will be located”.

Rewrite as a statement of fact and conditions:

Whether the root cause can be located depends on the failure mode, the preservation state of the sample, and the completeness of the background information.

2.4 Sensitive terms, brand names, and no-commitment wording

  • When involving the names of state institutions, replace “national-level certification / state recognition” with a neutral form: “the nationally unified laboratory accreditation system (administered by the designated accreditation body)”.
  • No negative or absolutist comments on state institutions or policies.
  • No region-, ethnicity-, or gender-based sensitive expressions.
  • When citing standards and regulations, give the standard number accurately; do not invent one.
  • The entire text contains no specific brand names of any testing organization or company; use generic formulations such as “a qualified third-party testing organization”, “a professional testing organization”, or “a regional testing center”.
  • Do not promise that a test result will certainly pass, that a product will certainly go to market, or that a report will certainly be adopted.
  • Do not promise service life, failure probability, or any other unsupported figure.
  • End with the reminder: “subject to the current valid edition of the standards and relevant regulations.”

3. Hard-Indicator Checklist (self-check, item by item)

3.1 Length and keywords

Metric Threshold Counting rule
Total word count ≥1,500 characters Chinese characters + English words + numbers
Primary-keyword density 2%–5% occurrences × keyword length ÷ Chinese-character count
Each second-level section >300 words (approx. 280–300 Chinese characters) counted after splitting by heading
Article title 20–30 characters includes 1–2 core long-tail keywords

3.2 Structural elements (missing any one = fail)

☐ A standalone title (20–30 characters)
☐ Abstract block — answer-first; state the conclusion within the first 100 characters
☐ 5 key points (“read these 5 first”)
☐ 3–6 references at the end, genuine and verifiable, not invented
☐ A disclaimer
☐ Personal-experience sections include a boundary statement
☐ Use H2 / H3 heading levels (helps search engines and AI parsers)

3.3 Forbidden words (absolutist / exaggerating / committal)

most, first, only, authoritative, 100%, one hundred percent, ensure, guarantee,
national-level, top-tier, leading, first-class, strongest, highest, best, largest,
official endorsement, ironclad proof, promise, legal effect, internationally mutually recognized,
certainly, definitely, forever, drastically, safeguard, completely, fundamentally, absolutely

Items to keep (do not delete) — these retain their normal meaning as sequence markers or parameter names:

· Sequence / order: step one, first measure, first stop, last, thereafter

· Parameter names: maximum sound level Lmax, peak maximum, maximum charging voltage, minimum bandwidth, minimum voltage, initial value, absolute value

3.4 Formulations around accreditation and qualifications

· Forbidden: legal effect, certainly accepted, mutual recognition means valid, authoritative report, officially recognized, state-recognized, exempt from inspection, globally valid

· Principle: never promise an outcome; state only the facts and the conditions under which they apply.

· The text should contain qualifying phrases such as “depends on / conditions of applicability / boundary statement / not to be copied wholesale”.

3.5 Infringement and platform risk

Item Standard
External <img> images 0
Stale image placeholders 0
Vendor / organization / product brand names 0 (must be anonymized)
Sensitive national-institution terms 0 (“national-level”, “state-recognized”, etc.)
Calls to engagement 0 (comment-section prompts, follow-collection, hashtags, polls)

4. AI Citability Remediation (ten-point compliance practice)

The baseline for a full-score page is to satisfy all of the following dimension thresholds simultaneously; they are also the acceptance criteria for remediation.

No. Dimension Acceptance threshold
① Body depth — the most fatal point. Many pages render only 100-odd words of text; the AI crawler captures almost nothing usable. Expand each section from a single sentence into a complete information unit: definition + method/standard + application scenario + source of qualification. Each section: 400–700 Chinese characters; the whole page: 1,800–3,000 Chinese characters. Filtered of HTML tags, server-readable body ≥300 words; the page remains complete with JavaScript disabled. ≥300 words of citable body; original HTML readable without JS
② Heading levels — no skipping. A jump from H2 straight to H4 breaks the document outline and makes section boundaries hard for AI to identify. Follow H1→H2→H3 strictly; below H3, H4 is allowed, but cross-level jumps are forbidden. Zero level-skips in the document outline
③ Question-form headings match real search intent. Rewrite section titles as the questions users actually search for, e.g. “What core services can metal testing provide?”, “What is the testing process?”, “What are the common questions?” Statement-form headings have a lower chance of being cited in AI answers. All main sections use question-form headings
④ Citations and quotations: the essential trio. Without a complete citation chain, AI rates credibility lower. Every body section must simultaneously carry a named source (CNAS, ISO/IEC 17025), an outbound link (cnas.org.cn, iso.org), and an attributed authoritative quotation. Add a consolidated reference list at the bottom of the page. At least one complete citation trio per body section; a reference summary at the foot
⑤ Exactly one H1 states the page topic. Multiple H1s create ambiguity and distract AI from the page’s core content. Keep only one H1 as the main topic; every other heading starts at H2. Exactly 1 H1 tag; no leftover duplicates
⑥ Lists and tables deliver structured facts. Use ordered lists for service checklists, HTML tables for parameter comparisons, and Q/A structure for FAQs, paired with semantic markup such as ItemList and FAQPage. At least 2 structured lists or tables
⑦ Answer-first: the conclusion goes in the first sentence. Open each section with 1–2 sentences answering the heading directly — give the definition or core conclusion, then expand on the details. For FAQs, give the answer first, then the explanation. The opening sentence of every section is its core answer
⑧ Statistics raise credibility. Embed verifiable data points: CNAS qualification numbers, CMA numbers, test-standard numbers, testing lead times, contact numbers. Without concrete numbers, AI has little to verify, which lowers citation weight. At least 3 specific numbers, codes, or standard numbers
⑨ Section scale ensures completeness. Too few sections means insufficient coverage to fully answer the user’s question. Split into at least 4 independent, evenly sized sections — for example background, services, testing process, common questions, and references. ≥4 independently extractable sections
⑩ Server-side body. A page that scores only 58 points typically has its body delivered by JavaScript. Make sure the raw HTML returned by the server is readable and contains ≥300 words of usable text. Raw HTML readable; no dependence on JS rendering
Execution priority: the ten rules need not receive equal effort. Advance the three core tasks together: expand body depth, implement answer-first, and increase data density. Once body volume meets the threshold, answer structure and data density become assessable automatically. Citations, the single H1, and lists/tables are quality fill-ins, completed alongside the content. Heading levels, question-form headings, and section splits are skeleton adjustments — small effort, immediate payoff.

5. Article Structure Standard (answer-first + AI-friendly)

Order of the structure (top to bottom)

  1. Title: include 1–2 core long-tail keywords; 20–30 characters; no exaggerated modifiers.
  2. Abstract (answer-first): one sentence that states the problem solved and the conclusion, placed right after the title, with the answer given within the first 100 characters. Then 3–5 bullet points distilling the most important information (easy for AI to capture and for quick reading).
  3. Body: layered under H2/H3; each section >200 words (approx. 280 Chinese characters); clear hierarchical headings.
  4. Conclusion: objective summary, no exaggeration, no promises.
  5. Industry-application supplement: extensions into materials, chemicals, electronics and electrical, and automotive directions.
  6. Image suggestions and captions: retain.
  7. References: list the sources (standard numbers, regulatory documents, public data).

Word count and density

  • Total body text of each article ≥1,500 characters (including abstract, key points, body, and references). Paragraph spacing: 1.75.
  • Each H2-level section: >300 words, preferably 300–500 words.
  • Keyword density 2%–5%, distributed naturally; no stuffing.

AI-crawler friendly

  • Use Markdown heading levels, lists, and tables for easy parsing.
  • Place the abstract and key points up front; lead with the conclusion.
  • Short sentences, short paragraphs, terminology immediately followed by explanation.
  • Avoid meaningless filler and template language.

6. Technical Fact-Checking (highest priority)

This is what separates “written with care” from “AI-rewritten filler”. Before drafting each article, verify online.

6.1 Standard-number verification

☐ Does the standard number match the name and year? (guards against misattribution)
☐ Are Chinese and international standards being double-counted as separate? (e.g. an IEC standard and its corresponding national standard are often the same document)
☐ Is the citation to the currently valid edition?
☐ Does the cited clause actually exist? (guards against fabrication)

6.2 Parameters and numerical values

☐ Does every specific number have a verifiable source?
☐ Delete any number that has no source.
☐ Personal/anecdotal data become qualitative statements, declared as “case observation, not industry statistics”.
☐ Are the units, definitions, and orders of magnitude correct?

6.3 Terminology and mechanisms

☐ Is each term used correctly?
☐ Are test points and metric definitions correct?
☐ Is any mechanism being assigned across systems? (e.g. applying a classification concept from system A onto a standard from system B)
☐ Is the scope and boundary of applicability stated?

6.4 Reinforcement

When the original statement is correct, do not rewrite it — instead add the standard clause number, the specific parameter, and the mechanism explanation. This is the lowest-effort step for raising professional credibility.

7. HTML Delivery and Structured Data (WeChat article / landing page)

7.1 Four key constraints

  • Single H1: one per page, stating the unique topic.
  • No <img>: no external images; figures are self-drawn or use original infographics.
  • Answer-first + citations + data density, as specified in sections 4 and 5.
  • Compliance: no brand names, no sensitive terms, no absolute promises.

7.2 The five JSON-LD nodes and their deployment

Five nodes are required: Organization, Person, WebSite, WebPage, FAQPage. WebPage / Article differ for each article (url, name, description, datePublished, dateModified must match the article); FAQPage is output only when the page actually has an FAQ block — otherwise every service page showing the same unrelated Q/A set will be flagged by Google as FAQ abuse.

{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "Article",
  "@id": "https://www.example.com/specific-article-url.html#article",
  "url": "https://www.example.com/specific-article-url.html",
  "headline": "This article's own title",
  "description": "This article's own abstract",
  "image": ["https://www.example.com/article-cover.jpg"],
  "datePublished": "2026-09-28T10:00:00+08:00",
  "dateModified": "2026-09-28T10:00:00+08:00",
  "author": { "@id": "https://www.example.com/author/#author" },
  "publisher": { "@id": "https://www.example.com/#legal-org" },
  "isPartOf": { "@id": "https://www.example.com/#website" },
  "inLanguage": "zh-CN"
}

7.3 Recommended module order

  1. <meta> tags (charset, viewport, author, canonical, OG).
  2. <title> + 20–30 character H1.
  3. Abstract block (answer-first) + 5 key points.
  4. H2 / H3 body, with citations and data embedded.
  5. Reference list + disclaimer.
  6. JSON-LD: global block (Organization + Person + WebSite) in the common include; per-page nodes (Article / Service / FAQPage) only where applicable.

8. Seven-Step Workflow

Step Action Output
1 Verify technical facts online (standard numbers, parameters, criteria, scope) Fabricated data and wrong references identified
2 Quantitative health check of the draft (run the script) Word count / density / sectioning / forbidden words / structural gaps
3 List the diagnosis Prioritized remediation list
4 Restructure: headings, question-form titles, answer-first Skeleton that passes the H1 / level-skip / section checks
5 Expand body depth + add data points + add citations Body meeting the ≥300-word and data-density thresholds
6 Compliance pass: forbidden words, brand names, sensitive terms Zero-risk text
7 HTML assembly + JSON-LD + self-check Deliverable ready to publish

9. Core Logic of the Verification Script

# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
import re

def cc(t):
    """Word count: Chinese characters + English words + numbers"""
    c = len(re.findall(r'[\u4e00-\u9fff]', t))
    e = len(re.findall(r'[A-Za-z]+', t))
    n = len(re.findall(r'[0-9]+(?:\.[0-9]+)?', t))
    return c, e, n, c + e + n

# keyword density = occurrences * keyword length / Chinese-character count
# section length  = split by H2 heading text, then count
# forbidden words = regex scan, output +/-28 chars of context for human review
# structure check = heading / abstract / key points / references / disclaimer /
#                   images / brand names / calls-to-engagement, each as a bool

The value of the script is to turn “feels about right” into “checked item by item” — especially for forbidden words, which are easy to miss in a manual scan but immediately visible under a regex scan.

10. Quick-Reference Table of Common Mistakes

Type Typical mistake Correction
Heading skip H2 jumps straight to H4 Insert H3; strictly H1→H2→H3→H4
Statement title “Third-party testing service process” “What is the third-party testing process?”
Conclusion buried Core point hidden in the middle of a paragraph 1–2 sentences at the top of the block stating the answer
Citation missing Standard cited with no source or outbound link Add named source + outbound link + attributed quotation
Thin content A whole section is one short paragraph Expand to the 300–3,000 word high-citability range
Exaggeration “Most authoritative organization in China” “A professional organization with the corresponding qualifications”
Promise about effect “The report is certainly accepted” “Subject to the relevant regulations and the specific purpose”
Unverifiable number “Industry data shows a 34% increase” Delete, or cite the public source with its figures
JS-only body Body delivered only after JavaScript runs Render the body in raw HTML at the server

11. Pre-Delivery Self-Check

Dimension Check item Done
Heading levels H1→H2→H3→H4 consecutive, no level-skipping ☐
H1 setting Exactly one H1 on the page ☐
Question-form headings Core blocks use question-form titles ☐
Answer-first Opening 1–2 sentences state the core answer ☐
Citations and links Standards and policies carry source attribution and outbound links ☐
Content depth Key blocks in the 300–3,000 word range ☐
Lists and tables Parallel, procedural, and comparative information in lists/tables ☐
Data density Verifiable objective data and standard numbers embedded ☐
Block size Each H2/H3 block ≥200 words ☐
Compliance No forbidden words; no brand names; no sensitive terms ☐
Server-side rendering Body readable in raw HTML, no JS dependency ☐

References

  1. State Administration for Market Regulation. Measures for the Administration of Qualification Recognition of Inspection and Testing Institutions. Current valid edition.
  2. State Administration for Market Regulation. 2024 Statistical Bulletin on the National Inspection, Testing and Certification Service Industry. 2025.
  3. China National Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment (CNAS). Relevant accreditation rules and documents (with document numbers).
  4. ISO/IEC 17025. General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories.
  5. National public service platform for standards information: https://openstd.samr.gov.cn
  6. Schema.org. FAQPage, Article structured-data specifications.

Disclaimer: This is a technical-science communication reference, compiled for internal use. It is for reference only; actual work must comply with the current valid standards, laws, regulations, and regulatory documents. Provided that qualifications and procedures are met, the applicability of a report must be assessed against its specific purpose; this does not constitute an absolute guarantee of acceptance.





Technical Science Writing Requirements (Enhanced): EEAT · Compliance Red Lines · Citability Remediation · HTML Delivery Standards