Schema Markup Analyzer
Validate schema with rich result eligibility and code generation.
Schema Markup Analyzer that checks required properties, not just validity
Paste a URL. We read the JSON-LD or microdata actually on the page, name the schema type, and check it against Google's own required-property list — not a generic "is this valid JSON" pass. You get missing required properties, missing recommended ones, and a plain answer on rich-result eligibility, plus which types can no longer produce a rich result at all, however clean the markup is.
Built and reviewed by Sayed Hasan, founder of SEOs Hut · Updated 28 September 2026 · Free, no signup
How do I know if my schema is working?
Not automatically. Google states plainly: "Google does not guarantee that your structured data will show up in search results, even if your page is marked up correctly." Working means two separate things — no errors in Rich Results Test, and every required property for that type present. Check both there and in Search Console's URL Inspection, since each tool tests something different.
Zero errors is not the same as eligible
Google's own words: "Google does not guarantee that your structured data will show up in search results, even if your page is marked up correctly according to the Rich Results Test." Valid markup only makes a page eligible for a feature — and for FAQPage and HowTo, that feature no longer exists in Google Search at all, no matter how clean the code is.
Required properties by type — and what's actually still live
Only three markup formats count towards eligibility: JSON-LD (Google's recommendation), Microdata and RDFa. Below that, some types have no required properties at all, and three have no rich result left to earn, regardless of what you write.
| Schema type | Required properties (Google's wording) | Rich result on offer | 2026 status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Article | None — "There are no required properties; instead, add the properties that apply to your content." | Article rich result | Live |
| Organization | None | Knowledge panel identity signals | Live |
| LocalBusiness | address, name | Local business rich result | Live |
| Product snippet | name, plus one of review, aggregateRating or offers | Product snippet | Live |
| Event | location (with location.address and location.name), name, startDate | Event rich result | Live |
| BreadcrumbList | itemListElement; each ListItem needs item, name, position | Breadcrumb trail in the result | Live |
| Review snippet | Type-specific — not itemised in Google's general policy page; check the type's own doc before publishing | Star rating snippet | Live |
| FAQPage | Irrelevant now — markup can be perfectly valid | FAQ rich result | Dead — restricted to government/health sites 8 Aug 2023, removed from Search from 7 May 2026, docs pulled 15 Jun 2026 |
| HowTo | Irrelevant now — markup can be perfectly valid | HowTo rich result | Dead — deprecated 13 Sep 2023, docs removed the same month |
| WebSite + SearchAction | Irrelevant now | Sitelinks searchbox | Dead — removed Nov 2024, nositelinkssearchbox directive archived |
Scroll the table sideways to see every column.
A missing required property is an error and kills eligibility outright. A missing recommended property is only a warning — Google's own example is a missing image, which still earns a rich result, just without the image.
Three tools testing three different things
“it will not fetch or interpret other @context URLs”
<b>validator.schema.org documentation</b> — Schema.org
validator.schema.org vs Rich Results Test vs URL Inspection
"It found no errors" can be true in one tool and irrelevant in another, because they are not testing the same thing.
| Question | validator.schema.org | Rich Results Test | Search Console URL Inspection |
|---|---|---|---|
| What is it actually testing? | Schema.org vocabulary and JSON-LD syntax | Eligibility for a specific Google-defined rich result | Whether Google's last crawl of this exact URL carries eligible markup |
| Checks eligibility for a Google search feature? | NoSyntax only, not a Google feature check | YesThis is its entire purpose | YesReports what Google detected on the indexed version |
| Fetches other @context URLs your JSON-LD references? | No"it will not fetch or interpret other @context URLs" | Not documented | Not documented |
| Reflects what Googlebot actually saw? | NoTests the code you paste, not a live crawl | PartialFetches the URL you give it, which may not match the last crawl | YesUses the last crawled and indexed version of the page |
Scroll the table sideways to see every column.
Errors kill eligibility. Warnings don't — necessarily.
In the Rich Results Test, an error disqualifies the page outright. A warning can shrink the result without killing it — Google's own example is a missing image property: the page still earns a rich result, just without the image. Treat every warning as a to-do list, not a blocker.
Two structural rules apply no matter which type you're marking up. The page carrying the markup must not be blocked by robots.txt or set to noindex, and the marked-up content has to be visible to someone actually reading the page — schema describing something the page doesn't show is against policy, not just risky.
If you're hit with a structured data manual action, read the scope correctly: it removes the rich result, full stop. It "doesn't affect how the page ranks in Google web search." Losing the star rating is not the same event as losing the ranking, and conflating them means fixing the wrong thing.
The four ways this goes wrong
All four come from treating one tool's output as the whole answer.
Trusting validator.schema.org alone
What happens: It confirms your JSON-LD parses as valid Schema.org vocabulary. It doesn't check whether Google will do anything with it, and it won't fetch other @context URLs your markup references.
Do this instead: Run it for syntax, then run the actual page through Rich Results Test and Search Console's URL Inspection before you tell a client it's live. Our Schema Generator writes markup to the current Google-required shape, so you're not starting from a type Google already retired.
Marking up FAQPage or HowTo and expecting a rich result
What happens: Both can be perfectly valid and produce nothing. FAQ rich results are restricted to authoritative government and health sites already and leave Search entirely from 7 May 2026. HowTo was deprecated back in September 2023.
Do this instead: Keep the FAQ content for users — the FAQPage markup itself has no upside left. Spend the time on types that still earn something: Product, Event, LocalBusiness, BreadcrumbList.
Letting schema and meta tags disagree
What happens: Google has documented that markup misaligned with what's actually on the page is unreliable. A price in your Product schema that doesn't match the visible page, or an org name that doesn't match your title tag, is exactly that kind of mismatch.
Do this instead: Check your meta tags against your schema in the same pass — they should describe the same page, not two versions of it.
Treating a manual action as a ranking penalty
What happens: A structured data manual action pulls the rich result. It does not touch where the page ranks.
Do this instead: Fix the property Search Console names, request review, and don't chase a ranking drop this action didn't cause. If rankings actually moved, run a full SEO audit — something else did that.
What actually happened to the three dead types
None of this changes whether the underlying content should exist — an FAQ section still answers real questions, which matters for our AEO Readiness Checker even though the markup around it stopped earning a rich result years ago.
FAQ rich results restricted
Google restricts the feature to "well-known, authoritative government and health websites." Every other site's FAQPage markup stops producing a result immediately.
HowTo rich results deprecated
Docs removed the same month. Valid HowTo markup no longer earns anything in Search.
Sitelinks searchbox removed
WebSite + SearchAction markup stops mattering; the nositelinkssearchbox directive is archived alongside it.
FAQ rich results leave Search entirely
Even the restricted government and health version is gone.
FAQPage documentation pulled
Google removes the documentation for the feature; the old doc URL now redirects elsewhere.
Five terms this topic keeps confusing
- Rich result
- An enhanced search result — stars, images, a breadcrumb trail — built from structured data Google chose to use. Eligible, not guaranteed.
- Eligibility
- The state of having every required property present with no errors. It's a precondition for a rich result, not a promise of one.
- Manual action
- A Google penalty applied to a specific issue. A structured data manual action removes rich-result eligibility only — it does not affect ranking.
- Entity
- An identity Google's Knowledge Graph recognises independently of any one page's markup. Your Organization schema claims one; whether Google actually recognises it is what our Entity Checker answers.
- LocalBusiness parity
- For a physical business, the address, name, phone and hours in your LocalBusiness schema and in your Google Business Profile should say exactly the same thing — a mismatch confuses more than it clarifies.
What to do with the report
Fix every required-property error first — those are the ones killing eligibility outright. Then work through warnings in order of how much they shrink the result. If the type you're marking up is FAQPage, HowTo or WebSite+SearchAction, spend zero further time on the markup and put the effort into content instead.
Schema Markup Analyzer FAQ
What is a schema validator?
Is schema still relevant?
How to check if JSON Schema is valid?
Is this the same as Google's Rich Results Test?
Why did it find no structured data on my page?
Is schema markup still relevant if it doesn't guarantee a result?
Primary sources used on this page
- Google: structured data general policies — no guarantee, three valid formats, required-property eligibility — developers.google.com
- Google: Article structured data has no required properties — developers.google.com
- Google: Product snippet required and recommended properties — developers.google.com
- Google: Event structured data required properties — developers.google.com
- Google: LocalBusiness and BreadcrumbList required properties — developers.google.com
- Google: Rich Results Test — errors vs warnings, out of beta — developers.google.com
- Google Search Central: updates log — HowTo deprecation, sitelinks searchbox removal — developers.google.com
- Schema.org: validator.schema.org documented limitations — schema.org
What to check once the markup itself is clean
Valid schema is one input. These confirm the identity, the content and the profile it's describing all agree with it.
Read the guide: local business schema: the form you fill in for Google and Website Breadcrumbs: Types, Benefits and Best Practices. Want it handled for you? See our Local SEO services.