How to Write an SEO Brief for a Website Redesign: Migration and Acceptance Checklist

How can you balance project timelines and search traffic during a website redesign? For an SEO requirements document for a website redesign, such as “cahier des charges seo refonte d'une site,” the project lead’s real challenge is not to write a few more optimization recommendations, but to ensure that the design, development, content, and marketing teams agree on the migration scope, delivery responsibilities, and acceptance criteria. Getting the pages to load is just the starting point. Whether existing traffic can reach the right new pages is what is most easily overlooked at launch.

Before work begins, document the existing site assets and the scope of the redesign

Don’t start the requirements document with “the new homepage needs to look better.” First confirm whether the redesign involves the visual design, content management system, domain, directory structure, or several of these at once. If neither the domain nor URL paths are changing, the focus may be on page content and technical implementation. If the domain is changing and multilingual directories are being restructured at the same time, migration testing and a post-launch monitoring period should be planned separately.

At a minimum, the existing-site inventory should cover current URLs, page types, titles, status codes, canonical URLs, and pages that generate organic search visits or inquiries. Verify the data using a combination of site crawl results, Google Search Console, web analytics tools, and records from the business team. Don’t look only at recent traffic: seasonal products and technical documentation with long purchasing cycles may also be worth retaining.

For pages scheduled for deletion, the requirements document should record the reason and how each page will be handled. For example, if a discontinued product has a replacement model, visitors can be directed to the relevant page. If there is no suitable replacement content, don’t redirect every page to the homepage just to eliminate errors. The business owner should confirm replacement options, the SEO specialist should assess search impact, and the developer should implement the changes—so there is no debate over who makes the decision on launch day.

Treat the migration map as a deliverable, not a last-minute launch attachment

The migration map should list each old URL, new URL, page type, handling method, owner, and test result. Preserve existing paths wherever possible. When a URL must change, use a permanent 301 redirect from the old address directly to the most relevant new address. Avoid redirect chains, and don’t send multiple old pages with different user intents indiscriminately to the homepage.

The requirements document should also specify URL conventions: how to handle capitalization, trailing slashes, parameters, pagination, and canonical URLs. Redirects, internal links, canonical tags, and the sitemap should all point to consistent target URLs. Pages that have been permanently removed without suitable replacement content can return a 404 or 410 status code. Choose the appropriate option based on the actual maintenance approach; not every 404 should be treated as a fault.

For international websites, language versions must be checked separately. Map the corresponding Chinese, English, and other-language pages individually; don’t redirect all old product detail pages to the homepage in another language on the new site. If you use hreflang, check the language and region codes, the relationships between pages, and the final URLs. Don’t invent a corresponding URL for a page that has no translation. Finalize multilingual URL paths before handing them over for translation and development in parallel; this will greatly reduce rework.

Write technical requirements as verifiable actions

“Search-engine-friendly pages” is not an acceptance criterion. The requirements document should specify whether important content and links can be accessed, whether pages return the correct status codes, whether titles and descriptions can be edited for each page, and who generates canonical tags, structured data, and the sitemap. Search engine access to the development environment should be restricted. At launch, remove any access restrictions, robots rules, and noindex tags that should not remain, checking each one individually.

After the design is approved, check the actual pages as well. If product specifications, use cases, and inquiry options exist only in images, they will be difficult for users to access and for the team to maintain. Key content loaded via scripts should be tested to confirm that search engines can access it. Don’t specify performance requirements simply as “loads fast.” Instead, select representative pages and test environments, record Core Web Vitals before and after launch, and assign responsibility for fixing any issues that fail to meet the requirements.

If the redesign involves changes to servers located in mainland China, the domain, or the hosting provider, include an ICP filing review in the project schedule. Whether an ICP filing, change, or hosting-provider connection procedure is required depends on the specific website and the requirements of the relevant authorities and hosting provider. Any applicable licensing requirements for commercial operations should be verified separately. If you need help organizing documents and reviewing the process, you can learn about the Domestic ICP Filing Service Number, but do not treat review times as a guaranteed launch date.

Conduct acceptance testing twice: check risks before launch and real-world signals afterward

Before launch, test at least the homepage, main category pages, key product pages, articles, and templates for each language. Verify high-traffic and high-inquiry pages, along with critical redirects, individually. Checks should cover not only page display, but also status codes, titles, canonical tags, internal links, form submissions, and mobile usability. Passing tests in the staging environment does not replace retesting in production.

After launch, submit the updated sitemap as soon as possible, check that important old URLs redirect as specified in the migration map, and continue monitoring crawling, indexing, and organic search performance. The requirements document should define the monitoring period, reporting frequency, escalation path for issues, and rollback conditions in advance. For example, if core pages become inaccessible or inquiry forms stop working, specify who decides whether to pause the release and who is responsible for restoring the site. Short-term fluctuations in rankings and traffic should not automatically be treated as proof of migration failure, but neither should they be used as a reason to ignore issues.

Don’t overlook acceptance testing for the marketing journey. Old ad landing pages, social media links, email links, and analytics events may still point to the previous URLs. Even if the pages redirect successfully, form attribution or conversion tracking may be interrupted. For projects that combine website development, SEO, and advertising operations, you can draw on the collaboration model of an integrated service such as 易营宝. Put URL migration, campaign links, and inquiry tracking on the same launch checklist instead of troubleshooting them separately after traffic problems arise.

Before finalizing the requirements document, ask the development, content, and marketing leads to sign off individually: Can they follow the plan? Who will supply missing materials? Which tasks will be affected by delays? In particular, it is better to spend more time checking the migration map and rollback plan during the design phase than to make these decisions on the day the domain is switched.