Structured data is missing a documented required property
What this check looks for
The page's ‹type› markup is missing ‹property›, which Google's documentation lists as required. Without it the markup parses but is not eligible for the rich result.
Why it matters
Markup that is valid JSON but incomplete produces no rich result and no error anywhere you would look. It is the state where the work has been done and none of the benefit arrives.
When the check passes, your report says: “Structured data carries every property Google documents as required”.
What it costs your score
When this check fails it removes 5 points from your SEO score, before the status, confidence and repeat multipliers are applied. SEO carries a weight of 5 in the overall score.
It shares the seo.structured-data family ceiling of 10 points: however many findings that family produces, together they cannot remove more than that from SEO. One underlying problem showing up in several places is still one problem.
- Severity
- low
- Default confidence
- high
- Status when triggered
- warn
- Deduction
- 5 points
- Family cap
- seo.structured-data · 10
- Category
- SEO
- Module
- Seo audit
- Fix owned by
- user
- In the ruleset since
- 2026.09
How to fix it
Add the missing property, or remove the markup if the data does not exist.
Incomplete markup is ineligible for the rich result and reports no error anywhere obvious.
Add the named property with a value that matches what is visible on the page.
Run the page through Google's Rich Results Test for a complete check across every type.
Where the required data does not genuinely exist — ratings, most often — leave the property out rather than inventing it.
Fix it in the component that generates the markup, not in the rendered page.
How to confirm it worked
Re-run this check, and confirm with Google's Rich Results Test
A named slot like ‹domain› — and the braces left in the configuration below — is filled in with your own values when this rule appears on a report.
Technical detail
‹issues›
Only two type families are checked here, and the narrowness is deliberate: BreadcrumbList and SoftwareApplication/WebApplication, where Google's documentation states a short, unambiguous requirement. We say nothing about the other types on the page, because guessing at requirements produces confident complaints about markup that is correct.
For a complete check across every type, use Google's Rich Results Test, which is generated from the same requirements and is updated when they change.
One requirement deserves a word of its own. SoftwareApplication needs aggregateRating or review, which means real ratings from real people. If you do not have them, omit the property and accept that the markup will not produce a rich result — it is still useful for entity understanding. Inventing a rating is a spam-policy violation and the sanction applies to the site, not the page.
Standards and references
Test this on your domain
Run the check that produces this finding, on its own, against any domain.
Other seo audit checks
- The page declares more than one canonical URL
- The canonical URL cannot be used
- The page declares no canonical URL
- The canonical URL points at a different page
- The page has no h1 heading
- The heading levels skip a level
- The page has more than one h1
- An hreflang annotation is not valid
- The hreflang set does not include this page
- The page's declared language is not a well-formed language tag
- The page does not declare what language it is written in
- Images on the page have no alt attribute