Standard SW-1:2026.2 · Category 7 of 9

Structured Data & Signals

Structured data does not improve rankings by itself, and this standard does not pretend otherwise. It determines eligibility for rich results, feeds entity understanding, and is increasingly the cheapest route to being quoted accurately by answer engines. We inspect validity first, coverage second.

Weight: 8 / 100
Checks: 4
Pass-blocking: 1
WOF analogue: Lights & indicators

SD-01Major failweight 3measured

Structured data is valid and error-free

Does your existing schema markup parse without errors?

Pass, advisory and fail criteria for SD-01
Pass	All structured data parses, required properties are present, and marked-up values match visible content.
Advisory	Valid with missing recommended properties that reduce rich-result eligibility.
Fail	Parse errors, missing required properties, or markup describing content not present on the page.

Why it matters

Invalid structured data is silently ignored, so the implementation cost is paid without any benefit — and nothing alerts you. Worse is markup that contradicts the page, such as review ratings for reviews that do not exist, which is a spam policy violation carrying manual action risk. Validity is a prerequisite for every rich result and increasingly for accurate machine summarisation.

How we inspect it

All JSON-LD, microdata and RDFa is extracted from the rendered DOM and validated for syntax, required and recommended properties per type, and consistency between markup values and visible page content.

Source: JSON-LD extraction with schema.org validation and rich-result eligibility testing

Remedy

1Validate every template with both the Rich Results Test and the Schema Markup Validator — they check different things.
2Supply all required properties for each type; recommended properties materially improve eligibility.
3Ensure every marked-up value appears in the visible content of the same page.
4Prefer JSON-LD in the head or body over inline microdata.
5Add validation to CI so a template change cannot silently break markup site-wide.

Verification

Recheck re-extracts and revalidates all structured data across inspected templates.

Usually fixed by: Developer
Effort: Medium · 2–8 hrs
Est. impact: medium
Typical cost: NZ$320–960

SD-02Minor failweight 2derived

Appropriate schema types implemented for page purpose

Are you marking up the entities that matter for your business?

Pass, advisory and fail criteria for SD-02
Pass	All applicable types are implemented on their corresponding templates, including a site-wide Organization or LocalBusiness entity.
Advisory	Core types present but secondary opportunities such as FAQ or HowTo unimplemented.
Fail	No structured data on commercially significant templates.

Why it matters

Schema coverage determines rich-result eligibility, which affects how much space you occupy in results and therefore click-through, independent of position. It also builds the entity graph that connects your organisation to its identifiers and profiles — increasingly the mechanism by which answer engines decide whether you are the same entity being discussed elsewhere.

How we inspect it

We classify each template by purpose and compare implemented types against those applicable and eligible for rich results, including Organization, Product, Article, FAQPage, LocalBusiness, BreadcrumbList and Service.

Source: Template classification mapped against applicable schema.org types

Remedy

1Implement a site-wide Organization or LocalBusiness entity with sameAs references to your verified profiles.
2Add Product markup with genuine price and availability on commerce templates.
3Add Article markup with author and datePublished on editorial templates.
4Add FAQPage only where genuine questions and answers are visible on the page.
5Connect entities with @id references rather than repeating disconnected blocks.

Verification

Recheck re-classifies templates and confirms applicable types are implemented and valid.

Usually fixed by: Developer
Effort: Medium · 2–8 hrs
Est. impact: medium
Typical cost: NZ$320–1,200

SD-03Advisoryweight 1measured

Open Graph and Twitter Card metadata complete

Does your content render correctly when shared?

Pass, advisory and fail criteria for SD-03
Pass	og:title, og:description, og:image, og:url and og:type present with a resolvable image of at least 1200 × 630.
Advisory	Present but the image is undersized or the description is truncated.
Fail	Missing on primary templates, or referenced images fail to resolve.

Why it matters

Social metadata does not affect rankings and is scored as advisory. It affects whether a shared link renders as a card with an image or as a bare URL, and that difference measurably changes click-through on shared links. It is a ten-minute fix that keeps paying every time someone shares a page.

How we inspect it

We extract social metadata and verify presence, absolute URLs, and that referenced images resolve at adequate dimensions.

Source: Head extraction of og: and twitter: properties plus image resolution check

Remedy

1Add the five core Open Graph properties to every template, generated from page data.
2Provide a 1200 × 630 image with an absolute URL; relative URLs will not resolve for scrapers.
3Add twitter:card as summary_large_image for editorial content.
4Validate with each platform's own debugger, since they cache aggressively.

Verification

Recheck re-extracts social metadata and confirms image resolution and property completeness.

Usually fixed by: Developer
Effort: Small · 0.5–2 hrs
Est. impact: low
Typical cost: NZ$120–320

SD-04Minor failweight 2declared

Business identity consistent across site and profile

Do your name, address and phone match your Business Profile exactly?

Pass, advisory and fail criteria for SD-04
Pass	Name, address and phone are identical across site content, structured data and Business Profile.
Advisory	Formatting differences only, such as abbreviations or phone number formatting.
Fail	Substantive divergence in name, street address, suite number or phone number.

Why it matters

For local search, consistency of business identity across sources is a core input into which entity a search engine believes you are. Divergent details — a different suite number, an old phone number, a trading name that does not match the registration — fragment your identity across multiple partial entities and suppress map visibility. It is one of the cheapest fixes in local SEO and one of the most commonly wrong.

How we inspect it

We extract name, address and phone from the site and LocalBusiness markup and compare against the Business Profile the site owner declares, normalising for formatting. Divergences are reported per field. This check is not applicable to businesses without a physical or service-area presence.

Source: On-site NAP extraction compared against the declared Business Profile

Remedy

1Decide one canonical formatting of name, address and phone and record it as a standard.
2Update site footer, contact page and LocalBusiness structured data to match exactly.
3Update the Business Profile and the major directory citations to match.
4Reference the Business Profile from sameAs in your structured data.
5Re-audit after any move, rebrand or phone change — these are the events that break it.

Verification

Recheck re-extracts on-site identity data and re-compares against the declared profile.

Usually fixed by: Owner
Effort: Small · 0.5–2 hrs
Est. impact: medium
Typical cost: NZ$120–400