How do I test a URL or code snippet with Google's Rich Results Test?

The Citead team, updated

In short. Test a URL or pasted code, inspect detected items, and review Google's required properties and content guidelines.

Definition: Google's Rich Results Test checks structured data from a URL or pasted code and reports detected rich-result items and issues. Structured data is markup that describes a page's content; rich results are enhanced search appearances that this markup can enable.

Key facts

Which input should be used?

Google's test instructions specify a full page URL with publicly accessible resources. Alternatively, selecting Code accepts pasted markup; Run test repeats the check after edits.

Google's introduction describes JSON-LD as data embedded in an HTML script element. Microdata and RDFa use HTML attributes to describe content. Google recommends JSON-LD when the site's setup allows it. Its documentation also explains that Google can read JSON-LD injected into page content by JavaScript.

What code can be tested?

Google's guidelines contain a multi-item example with a recipe and breadcrumb information. This snippet extracts the breadcrumb object and wraps it in a JSON-LD script element for a Code test:

<script type="application/ld+json">
{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "BreadcrumbList",
  "itemListElement": [{
    "@type": "ListItem",
    "position": 1,
    "name": "Recipes",
    "item": "https://example.com/recipes"
  }, {
    "@type": "ListItem",
    "position": 2,
    "name": "Bread recipes",
    "item": "https://example.com/recipes/bread-recipes"
  }, {
    "@type": "ListItem",
    "position": 3,
    "name": "How To Make Banana Bread"
  }]
}
</script>

The example values come from Google's sample. For a published page, the same guidelines require structured data to represent its visible content accurately and to appear on the page it describes.

How should detected items be interpreted?

Google's help lists valid items, warnings, invalid items, parsing failures and a no-items status. Expanding an issue opens details; its description locates the problem in rendered code.

Google's introduction explains that required properties determine eligibility for enhanced display. Recommended properties should contain complete, accurate information. Google Search Central's feature documentation defines the properties that have special meaning for Google Search; Schema.org contains additional attributes and objects.

Google's guidelines explain that a page can describe multiple items, such as a recipe and a video. Google understands both nested items and separate blocks. Each item needs the required properties for its own rich result type.

Does a valid result settle search eligibility?

Google's guidelines distinguish technical checks from quality requirements. The Rich Results Test and URL Inspection catch most technical errors; quality requirements also cover relevance, visible content and up-to-date information. Correct markup can still receive an ordinary text result, depending on Google's selection for the search request.

Google's introduction recommends testing during development and monitoring rich result status reports after deployment because templating or serving issues can break markup.

FAQ

Can you test code before publishing a page?

Yes. Google's help allows arbitrary code snippets through Code mode.

Google's introduction prioritizes complete, accurate recommended properties over filling every possible field with incomplete or inaccurate data. You must still include every required property for the relevant feature.

Sources

  1. Google Search Console Help, "Rich Results Test", undated
  2. Google Search Central, "Introduction to structured data markup in Google Search", 10 December 2025
  3. Google Search Central, "General structured data guidelines", 10 July 2026

Check how a page reads to answer engines. Open the GEO score analyzer

Test a page and see what to fix first

The analysis usually takes less than 10 seconds and needs no account.

400,000+ pages scored in the public benchmark