Why Google’s Rich Results Tool Can Be Misleading

Google’s Rich Results tool is often used to check structured data, but it can sometimes provide misleading information, making it less effective for debugging. When errors or issues arise, relying solely on this tool may not always give an accurate picture. For those looking to properly validate their structured data, a more reliable alternative is available.

A recent discussion in an SEO-focused Facebook group brought attention to the limitations of Google’s structured data testing tool. Many users found that the tool displayed incorrect results, leading to confusion and making Schema.org structured data difficult to debug. This issue has sparked conversations about the need for a better approach to verifying structured data accuracy.

Experts in the field suggest using Schema.org’s own validation tool, which offers a more precise analysis. Unlike Google’s tool, which primarily focuses on whether structured data qualifies for rich results, Schema.org’s validator ensures compliance with proper formatting and best practices.

While this article does not provide a direct link to the private Facebook discussion, it includes screenshots from the debugging process of the website in question. These examples highlight the importance of choosing the right tool for structured data validation and avoiding potential errors that could affect search performance.

 

WordPress Plugin For Structured Data

The discussion was initiated by a user who was utilising a WordPress plugin to generate their structured data. Initially, someone blamed the SEO plugin, suggesting that structured data output from plugins was insufficient. However, this assumption was later proven incorrect. The issue appeared to stem from the type of structured data selected by the user rather than a fault with the plugin itself.

Structured data plugins provide several benefits when it comes to implementing Schema.org structured data. Firstly, they automate the otherwise complex task of generating a JSON-LD structured data script, making the process significantly easier. Secondly, these plugins ensure that the required structured data is correctly outputted according to Google’s guidelines. Lastly, they offer automatic updates whenever Google modifies its structured data requirements, keeping websites compliant with the latest standards.

The main limitation of using a plugin, as seen in this case, arises when a user selects an inappropriate structured data type for their content. For example, if the ideal option is “LocalBusiness” but it is only available in the paid version of the plugin, the user may opt for “AggregateRating” instead. This mismatch can lead to errors, affecting the structured data’s effectiveness in search results.

 

Google Rich Results Tool Error

The user should have been using the LocalBusiness structured data, but the actual code on the page was set to AggregateRating. However, when they checked it using Google’s structured data testing tool, the tool incorrectly indicated that LocalBusiness structured data was being used.

Interestingly, Google’s tool does allow users to view the structured data within the HTML, and it correctly displayed that the page contained AggregateRating rather than LocalBusiness structured data. This contradiction created confusion for the user.

The issue stems from the way Google’s tool detects structured data. It picks up LocalBusiness structured data because it is nested within AggregateRating, even though AggregateRating itself is not detected. The tool is primarily designed to identify structured data relevant to rich results, but its label misleadingly suggests that it displays all detected structured data.

 

Why Did Google’s Tool Fail?

The issue arose because the website was using AggregateRating structured data to review a local business. However, Google’s Rich Results Test tool mistakenly identified it as LocalBusiness structured data, failing to recognise that the script was actually for AggregateRating.

Unlike Google’s tool, the official Schema.org validator correctly identified the structured data. This doesn’t necessarily mean that Google’s tool is faulty. Instead, it suggests that the tool is primarily designed to check whether a website’s structured data qualifies for rich results rather than validating the structured data itself. This could explain why it misrepresented the data in this case.

For those struggling to debug structured data—especially if reading HTML isn’t their strong suit—the Schema.org validation tool might be a more reliable option. It offers a clearer understanding of any errors or misconfigurations.

SEO professionals and website publishers may benefit from adding the official Schema.org Structured Data Validator to their toolkit to ensure their structured data is correctly implemented.