TS19URLs and canonicals

Do your filters create an endless URL space?

Parameters, filters and calendars do not create an infinite URL space.

Prepare evidence

In the app: Evidence import
You provide: Parameters and navigation rules
Allow for: Depends on evidence needed

Prepare evidence

Understand

More filters. How far do the URLs go?

Parameters, filters and calendars do not create an infinite URL space.

According to Google

Combinable filters can generate huge numbers of similar URLs and waste crawling resources.

URL structure best practices for Google Source accessed on 2026-10-26

Check

Parameters. Which combinations?

In TSEP Control

You import evidence for this control. The engine assesses it within the declared scope; missing items remain visible.

Your contribution

Define the scope and expectations before collection. Gather the items below and supply the requested reviews.

With your own tools

Sample combinations of filters, sorting and pagination. Record distinct URLs, equivalent content and navigation limits, then compare them with your crawling policy.

Evidence to retain

Indexing and navigation rule for each parameter pattern.

What this result covers

The actual crawled volume requires logs or Search Console.

Act

Useful filters. Deliberate limits.

Define useful combinations and bound the spaces that produce endless URLs.

Recheck

The same filters. A controlled URL space?

After correction, gather new evidence with the same scope and expectations. Retain both dated observations to compare what changed.

Your reference points

To go further.

Statuses, sources and method.

Understand the statusesC · NC · NT · NA

The same legend in guides, analysis and demo. Each status depends on the control’s evidence and rules.

C · Verified: The criterion is met within the assessed scope. Keep dated evidence for the next comparison.
NC · To correct: Define useful combinations and bound the spaces that produce endless URLs.
NT · Not established: Evidence or confirmations are insufficient to conclude. Supply what is missing; this status does not establish an SEO error.
NA · Not applicable: The control does not apply to the scope under its rules, with a retained justification. Missing evidence alone does not make it non-applicable.

Sources and references1 reference

URL structure best practices for Googledevelopers.google.com · new tab

Detailed method and rules2 rules

Control method and criteria

Method
Group URLs by pattern, count combinations and look for crawl traps.

Acceptance criteria
Each tested pattern has a navigation/indexing policy; observed limits and traps are explained without inferring actual crawl volume.

Non-applicability
Inventory attesting to the absence of such patterns.

Detailed rules

TS19-A01 · Bounded combinatorial-pattern policy

Protocol assessment mode : assisted, with supplied evidence and declarations. App availability is shown on the control card.

Scope
Explicitly selected TS19 items; url-policy-v1 profile defined in docs/url-policy-evidence.md.

Evidence
Prior plan, original bytes and SHA-256, dates/context, atomic observations, reasoned human review bound to the entire dossier. Kinds: configuration, intent.

Method
Compare max_combinations, navigation and indexing in native url-pattern-config-v1 with each prior pattern; require review of the chosen bounds.

Acceptance criteria
Every supplied axis matches the selected finite plan. A conflicting value, including zero against a positive planned limit, fails.

When the result remains inconclusive
Missing axis/configuration, non-integer bound outside1–128 or absent review: inconclusive.

Non-applicability
No atomic exemption in this profile. Empty population or absent evidence: NT, never automatic NA.

Assumptions
Supplied population and provenance; review assumes scope sufficiency and business judgment. Content, imported verdicts or hashes never prove authenticity.

Limitations
Bounded offline reading, without collection, browser execution, generated human judgment or real audit. Reviewed source scope only; no site completeness, indexing, ranking or causality inferred.

TS19-A02 · Observed population and trap decision

Protocol assessment mode : assisted, with supplied evidence and declarations. App availability is shown on the control card.

Scope
Explicitly selected TS19 items; url-policy-v1 profile defined in docs/url-policy-evidence.md.

Evidence
Prior plan, original bytes and SHA-256, dates/context, atomic observations, reasoned human review bound to the entire dossier. Kinds: crawl, intent.

Method
Read url-crawl-v1, count distinct URLs and compare with the finite list and bound; retain the reasoned trap/cycle decision and its review.

Acceptance criteria
Observed URLs belong to the planned population, their count respects the bound and traps are explained. An outside URL or exceeded bound fails.

When the result remains inconclusive
Incomplete supplied crawl, ambiguous identities, absent list or decision: inconclusive. A finite sample never proves whole-site finiteness.

Non-applicability
No atomic exemption in this profile. Empty population or absent evidence: NT, never automatic NA.

Assumptions
Supplied population and provenance; review assumes scope sufficiency and business judgment. Content, imported verdicts or hashes never prove authenticity.

Rule version 0.3.0-draft.2 · Public protocol reference · Versioned source

Put it into practice

← Back to controls