The playbook
Schema Markup: Checklist
Use this schema markup checklist before a new release, a handoff, or a scheduled review. Its purpose is to verify the decisions that affect valid relevant structured-data items. Check an actual page or query record; a box marked complete without evidence does not show that the customer journey works.
Put the task in context
Select an appropriate type for facts the page actually presents. A product page, article, and local business page describe different entities. Validate both syntax and the applicable feature guidance. Valid markup alone does not guarantee a special search appearance.
Before you use the checklist
Name the exact item being checked and its purpose. Gather URL, type, property, evidence. If one of those details is unknown, mark it as unknown and assign a way to resolve it. An invented value makes the checklist look complete while weakening every later decision.
Working checklist
| Check | Evidence to keep | Responsible role |
|---|---|---|
| Choose a supported type that matches the page | A dated observation showing how URL was verified | SEO lead |
| Populate properties with accurate visible information | A dated observation showing how type was verified | content or development owner |
| Validate syntax and check eligibility guidance | A dated observation showing how property was verified | analytics owner |
Check the failure path
- Look specifically for this failure: inventing ratings or adding markup for hidden content.
- Mark up only supported facts and remove misleading properties. Record the actual correction, not just the intention to make it.
- Repeat the affected task after the correction and check evidence.
- Make sure the next owner can find the decision and supporting evidence.
Use three outcomes for each check
Mark an item as complete only when the expected behavior or information has been observed. Mark it as incomplete when a required condition is absent. Use not applicable when the condition genuinely does not belong to the chosen scope, and write a short reason. These states keep a review useful without forcing every process into an identical mold.
For example, if the check is “Choose a supported type that matches the page,” a meeting about the subject is not the evidence itself. Retain the relevant URL and type, the decision made from them, and the result of checking that decision. The record should allow someone who missed the meeting to understand what changed.
Decide what must be resolved first
An incomplete item that prevents describe visible page entities using appropriate structured data deserves attention before a cosmetic improvement. Assign an owner and a next action to that issue. Keep optional refinements visible, but do not let them obscure a failure in the core process.
Close the review
Recheck corrected items and note anything still uncertain. The checklist is finished when the next owner understands what was verified and what remains open. Follow valid relevant structured-data items using a consistent definition so later reviews can connect execution quality with useful results.
Search results and indexing decisions are not controlled by the publisher. Record what your team changed and what was observed afterward. Avoid turning a correlation between a release and a traffic change into a claim of proven causation.
Skip the manual steps. Let AgentixSEO run this for every client.
Start now