TS33Structured data

What actually blocks your structured data?

Identify issues that prevent rich results, and those that can wait.

Prepare evidence

In the app: Evidence import
You provide: JSON-LD and validation results
Allow for: Depends on evidence needed

Prepare evidence

Understand

A rich result. Requirements to meet.

Errors, warnings and unsupported uses are distinguished.

According to Google

An item with a critical issue is invalid for the affected rich result. Non-critical issues do not prevent that display; correct markup still does not guarantee it.

Rich result report overview Source accessed on 2026-10-26

Check

The markup test. Google’s feedback.

In TSEP Control

Today, this workflow uses evidence import (expert mode). It does not automatically read markup from a URL. The engine assesses the imported items within the declared scope.

Your contribution

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

With your own tools

Use the Rich Results Test on the URL or code. In Search Console, open the report for the relevant type and distinguish indexed data from the live test. Separate critical issues, non-critical issues and unsupported types.

Evidence to retain

Report with no blocking error and qualified warnings.

What this result covers

Vocabulary names and roles only; no inferred complete semantic validity, cross-snapshot correspondence, current eligibility or display. Supplied origins and dates are not authenticated.

Act

Critical issues first. In the site’s code.

Fix critical issues in the site’s source code first. Then address non-critical issues useful to your content; do not mark up information hidden from visitors.

Recheck

Retest the page. Request validation.

After the fix, test the live page, then use “Validate fix” on the Search Console issue page. Google first checks a sample. Validation can take two weeks or more depending on crawl frequency; no completion date is guaranteed. Keep the current test separate from indexed-version observations.

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: Fix critical issues in the site’s source code first. Then address non-critical issues useful to your content; do not mark up information hidden from visitors.
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 references5 references

Detailed method and rules3 rules

Control method and criteria

Method
Qualify the plan; recompute capture syntax and Schema.org names; separately classify native indexed-version messages and their decisions.

Acceptance criteria
All three rules pass within the declared scope: qualified plan, attributed syntax and names, indexed messages without blocking errors and with an exact review. Correspondence between snapshots remains unestablished.

Non-applicability
No NA in this profile; missing markup or evidence remains NT.

Detailed rules

TS33-A01 · Qualified prior scope, features and layers.

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

Scope
Selected page, bound HTTP/DOM JSON-LD captures and separate indexed APIv1 snapshot.

Evidence
Plan, native captures, pinned vocabulary30.1, original API outputs and bound reviews; jsonld-validation-layers-v1 contract.

Method
Check prior plan, dated feature guidance and bound scope/support/separation review.

Acceptance criteria
Three supported qualifications; reasoned contradiction fails, absence/unknown is inconclusive.

When the result remains inconclusive
Missing evidence/review/runtime, unattributed layer, unknown format/severity or undetected feature; independent errors retained.

Non-applicability
No NA in this profile.

Assumptions
Supplied/reviewed origin, dates and completeness, not authenticated; Google backend version unexposed.

Limitations
Schema.org names only; separate snapshots, no inferred live test, current eligibility, display or indexing.

TS33-A02 · Syntax and vocabulary names on bound captures.

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

Scope
Selected page, bound HTTP/DOM JSON-LD captures and separate indexed APIv1 snapshot.

Evidence
Plan, native captures, pinned vocabulary30.1, original API outputs and bound reviews; jsonld-validation-layers-v1 contract.

Method
Reprocess source/DOM with TS31 readers; compare classes/properties with complete Schema.org30.1, equivalent HTTP/HTTPS namespaces.

Acceptance criteria
Attributed typed graphs without syntax error, missing term or contradictory role; unknowns remain distinct.

When the result remains inconclusive
Missing evidence/review/runtime, unattributed layer, unknown format/severity or undetected feature; independent errors retained.

Non-applicability
No NA in this profile.

Assumptions
Supplied/reviewed origin, dates and completeness, not authenticated; Google backend version unexposed.

Limitations
Schema.org names only; separate snapshots, no inferred live test, current eligibility, display or indexing.

TS33-A03 · Native Google messages and decisions retained without downgrade.

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

Scope
Selected page, bound HTTP/DOM JSON-LD captures and separate indexed APIv1 snapshot.

Evidence
Plan, native captures, pinned vocabulary30.1, original API outputs and bound reviews; jsonld-validation-layers-v1 contract.

Method
Read all APIv1 messages, severities and features; bind an exact review to the indexed response, separate from current captures.

Acceptance criteria
No ERROR/FAIL; exact coverage and qualifications. Error, omission or downgrade fails even when documented; technical failure is inconclusive.

When the result remains inconclusive
Missing evidence/review/runtime, unattributed layer, unknown format/severity or undetected feature; independent errors retained.

Non-applicability
No NA in this profile.

Assumptions
Supplied/reviewed origin, dates and completeness, not authenticated; Google backend version unexposed.

Limitations
Schema.org names only; separate snapshots, no inferred live test, current eligibility, display or indexing.

Rule version 0.2.0-rc.1 · Public protocol reference · Versioned source

Put it into practice

← Back to controls