Rich Results Test Tool: How to Check Your Structured Data (Now That Google Is Cutting It Back)

Google's Rich Results Test is still the fastest way to check whether a page's structured data is valid and eligible for a rich result — but "still" is doing real work in that sentence. As of June 2026, the tool stopped reporting on FAQ markup at all, following Google's May 2026 decision to retire FAQ rich results for every site. If you've been relying on it as a blanket health check for all your schema, it's worth knowing exactly what it does and doesn't cover before you trust a clean report.

What the Rich Results Test Actually Checks

The tool does two distinct things, and conflating them is the most common way people misread its output:

1. Syntax and schema validity — does your JSON-LD parse correctly, are required fields present, does the structure match the schema.org type you declared. This part is comprehensive and still fully supported.
2. Rich result eligibility — whether Google currently offers a visible rich result for that markup type at all, and whether your specific page qualifies. This part shrinks whenever Google retires a result type, independent of whether your code is correct.

A page can pass validation cleanly and still show zero eligible rich results, because the markup is valid but the result type no longer exists in Search. That's exactly the situation FAQ schema is in now — Google deprecated the FAQ rich result in May 2026, and by June the Rich Results Test had removed FAQ from its list of checks entirely rather than continuing to validate for a result that can't appear.

What's Changing in the Tool Itself

Google has been narrowing what this tool reports on, not just what schema types earn a visible result:

| Change | Status | |---|---| | FAQ markup removed from rich result checks | Live since June 2026 | | Search Console's FAQ-specific rich result report | Removed June 2026 | | Search Console API support for FAQ data | Scheduled to end August 2026 | | HowTo rich results (mobile) | Deprecated August 2023, still not restored |

The pattern is consistent: Google trims a result type from Search, then removes the corresponding reporting surface a few months later so the tooling doesn't keep tracking something that no longer has a payoff. If a schema type you rely on gets a deprecation notice, expect the testing and reporting tools to follow within a quarter or two, not immediately.

How to Use the Tool Correctly

1. Test the live URL, not a local file, when you can. The URL-based test fetches your page the way Googlebot would, which catches issues a code-only paste misses — blocked resources, JavaScript-rendered markup, or a noindex header that makes the whole exercise moot.
2. Read the eligibility section separately from the errors section. Zero errors with zero eligible rich results usually means the markup is fine but the result type isn't currently offered — not that something is broken.
3. Re-test after every deploy that touches templates. Structured data commonly breaks silently when a template change moves a field, not when someone edits the JSON-LD directly.
4. Don't chase warnings that aren't errors. The tool distinguishes required fields (errors) from recommended fields (warnings). A warning won't block eligibility; treat it as optional polish, not a blocker.

What "Not Eligible" Actually Means

When the tool reports a page as ineligible for a rich result, there are three different reasons, and only one of them is something you can fix with markup:

• The result type doesn't exist for your site's context (region, language, or the type was pulled entirely, as with FAQ). No markup change fixes this.
• A policy requirement isn't met — content mismatches between the visible page and the structured data, spam signals, or a required trust signal Google hasn't confirmed for your domain yet.
• A technical gap — a required property is missing, or the field exists in code but never actually renders on the visible page, which Google checks against.

If eligibility has quietly changed for pages that used to qualify, it's worth checking whether Google removed the result type broadly rather than assuming your implementation regressed. The FAQ Schema Markup deprecation is a recent example of exactly this — sites did nothing wrong, the reward disappeared.

Alternatives and Complements to the Official Tool

The Rich Results Test is Google's authoritative source for eligibility, but it's not the only useful check:

• Schema.org's own validator checks syntax against the broader vocabulary, including types Google doesn't surface as rich results at all — useful if you're adding markup for other consumers, like AI systems that parse structured data independently of Search's rich result program.
• Browser dev tools (View Source, or an extension that highlights JSON-LD) confirm the markup is actually present in the rendered HTML your users and crawlers receive, which catches client-side rendering issues the official tool sometimes misses on JavaScript-heavy pages.
• A scheduled recheck, not just a one-time test at launch. Structured data health isn't a launch-day task — templates change, plugins update, and a field that validated in January can silently break in July. Traffic Monitor tracks Search Console's indexing and appearance data on a schedule specifically so a schema regression shows up close to when it happens rather than during an unrelated audit months later.

A Quick Structured Data Health Checklist

Run through this whenever you add new markup or after a template change:

• [ ] Test the live URL, not a code snippet in isolation
• [ ] Confirm zero errors (warnings are optional)
• [ ] Confirm the result type is still active in Search — check Google's structured data deprecation history if a type you rely on has gone quiet
• [ ] Verify the rendered HTML matches what the tool tested (View Source or dev tools)
• [ ] Re-test after any template, CMS, or plugin update that touches the page

Structured data validation and rich result eligibility are two different questions, and Google's own tool increasingly answers only the first one for shrinking result types. Confirm your markup is technically correct with the Rich Results Test, then separately confirm the result type you're targeting still exists — the second check is the one that's changing underneath you without warning, as Schema Markup Validator covers in more depth for AI Overview citation specifically.