[Tool: URL input and “Check this page” button]
What it checks
Structured data
| Check | What it tells you |
|---|---|
| Structured data found | Whether the page has JSON-LD, microdata or RDFa, and which types |
| JSON-LD parses | Whether each block is valid JSON, since one broken character stops the whole block being read |
| Required and recommended properties | Missing properties for Google-supported types, such as a Product with no price or an Article with no author |
| Retired rich results | Types that no longer produce rich results in Google, such as FAQ rich results, which ended on 7 May 2026 |
| Business entity | Whether Organization or LocalBusiness markup defines who runs the site |
| Author markup | Whether articles name an author |
| Breadcrumbs | Whether BreadcrumbList is present and matches the URL |
| Connected entities | Whether schema blocks reference each other or repeat disconnected copies |
For the official word on rich result eligibility, the results link to Google’s Rich Results Test.
On-page basics
| Check | What it tells you |
|---|---|
| Status and redirects | The final status code and any redirect chain |
| HTTPS | Whether the page is served securely |
| Title and meta description | Present, their length, and whether they’re likely to be cut off in results |
| Canonical tag | Present, and whether it points to this page or somewhere else |
| Robots directives | Whether the page is noindexed by a meta tag or HTTP header |
| Headings | One H1, and no skipped heading levels |
| Images | Missing alt text, missing width and height, very large files |
| Links | Internal and external link counts, empty or vague anchors |
| Mobile and language | A viewport tag and a declared language |
| Hreflang | Valid tags with a self-reference, where used |
| Social sharing | Open Graph title, description and image |
| robots.txt and sitemap | Whether both are reachable at the site root |
| Core Web Vitals | Real-user data from Google’s PageSpeed Insights, where Google has enough for the page |
AI readiness
| Check | What it tells you |
|---|---|
| AI crawler access | Whether robots.txt blocks crawlers such as OAI-SearchBot, GPTBot, PerplexityBot, ClaudeBot or Google-Extended |
| Direct answer | Whether the page opens with a clear passage that answers its main question |
| Questions and answers | Visible FAQs or question-led headings |
| Author and credentials | A named author, which helps readers and AI systems judge trust |
| Dates | Visible published or updated dates |
| Business identity | Clear, consistent business naming and entity markup |
How to read the results
A fail is something likely to stop the page being indexed, understood or shown well, such as a noindex tag, a broken JSON-LD block or a missing title. Fix these first.
A warning is worth reviewing but may be deliberate. A canonical pointing to another page is right for a duplicate and wrong for a page you want to rank.
A pass means the check found nothing to worry about. It doesn’t mean the page will rank.
There’s no overall score out of 100. A single number hides which problems matter, so the results show counts of passes, warnings and fails instead.
Not every AI crawler block is a mistake
Some crawlers collect data for training and others fetch pages for search answers, and they’re controlled separately. OpenAI, for example, documents OAI-SearchBot for ChatGPT search and GPTBot for training. Blocking a training crawler can be a reasonable choice. Blocking a search crawler means that assistant can’t read the page when answering. The checker reports each one separately so you can decide.
It also reports whether the site has an llms.txt file, as information only. Google says you don’t need one to appear in its AI features.
What the checker doesn’t do
- It checks one page, not a whole site. Problems that only show across many pages, such as duplicate titles, orphan pages or crawl waste, need a full crawl. That’s what a technical SEO audit covers.
- It isn’t Google’s official test. Search Console and the Rich Results Test are the final word on how Google sees your page.
- It doesn’t predict rankings. Passing every check doesn’t guarantee a page will rank, because content quality, competition and links matter too.
- Some pages can’t be checked. Pages behind a login, blocked to automated requests or very slow to load may not return results.
What happens to your data
The checker fetches the page you enter, runs the checks and shows the results. It doesn’t store the page’s content. It keeps the address checked and the summary of results, to prevent misuse and improve the tool. If you ask for the full report by email, your details are used as explained in the privacy policy.
Get the full report
The on-screen results are free. If you’d like a PDF with every check explained and a prioritised fix list, enter your email and it’s sent straight over.
What to do next
If the checker found problems you’d like help with, get in touch or ask for a free assessment of the whole site. The schema markup and AI citation readiness services cover the structured data and AI checks in depth, and which schema types still matter explains the schema results.
FAQ
Is the SEO checker really free?
Yes. The checks and on-screen results are free, with no account and no email needed. If you want a PDF report with every check explained, you can enter your email to receive it, and that’s optional. Daily limits apply so the tool can’t be used to overload other websites.
Why does my page pass but still not rank?
Because the checker tests technical and on-page basics, not everything that affects rankings. Content quality, how well the page answers the search, competition and links all matter too. A page can be technically sound and still be outranked by more useful or more trusted pages.
Does FAQ schema still matter if FAQ rich results have ended?
FAQ rich results no longer show in Google, so FAQ markup won’t change how your listing looks. Visible questions and answers on the page still help readers, and structured markup can still help search engines and AI systems understand the content. The checker reports it as information, not as a fail.