When the user wants to add, fix, or optimize schema markup and structured data on their site. Also use when the user mentions "schema markup," "structured data," "JSON-LD," "rich snippets," "schema.org," "FAQ schema," "product schema," "review schema," "breadcrumb schema," "Google rich results," "knowledge panel," "star ratings in search," or "add structured data." Use this whenever someone wants their pages to show enhanced results in Google. For broader SEO issues, see seo-audit. For AI search optimization, see ai-seo.
81
73%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
93%
1.14xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/schema-markup/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
89%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a strong description with excellent trigger term coverage and clear 'when to use' guidance, including helpful cross-references to related skills that reduce conflict risk. The main weakness is that the 'what' portion is somewhat general ('add, fix, or optimize') and could benefit from listing more specific concrete actions like generating JSON-LD snippets, validating markup, or implementing specific schema types.
Suggestions
Expand the capability description with more specific actions, e.g., 'Generates JSON-LD code, validates existing schema markup, implements FAQ/Product/Review schemas, and tests structured data for Google Rich Results eligibility.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names the domain (schema markup/structured data) and mentions actions like 'add, fix, or optimize,' but doesn't list multiple specific concrete actions such as generating JSON-LD code, validating existing markup, implementing specific schema types, or testing with Google's Rich Results tool. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (add, fix, or optimize schema markup and structured data) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when' clause with extensive trigger terms). Also includes helpful cross-references to related skills (seo-audit, ai-seo) for disambiguation. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would say: 'schema markup,' 'structured data,' 'JSON-LD,' 'rich snippets,' 'schema.org,' 'FAQ schema,' 'product schema,' 'review schema,' 'breadcrumb schema,' 'Google rich results,' 'knowledge panel,' 'star ratings in search,' and 'add structured data.' These are highly natural and comprehensive. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Very clearly scoped to schema markup and structured data specifically, with explicit boundary-setting by referencing related but distinct skills (seo-audit for broader SEO, ai-seo for AI search optimization). The trigger terms are highly specific to this niche. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
57%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a moderately well-structured skill that serves as a decent reference guide for schema markup implementation. Its main strengths are good organization, appropriate progressive disclosure, and useful reference tables. Its weaknesses are insufficient executable code examples in the main file, some verbose/obvious guidance that Claude doesn't need, and a workflow that separates validation from implementation steps rather than integrating them as checkpoints.
Suggestions
Add at least 2-3 complete, copy-paste-ready JSON-LD examples inline (e.g., Article, FAQPage) rather than deferring all examples to a separate file—the main skill should be actionable on its own.
Remove or drastically condense the 'Core Principles' section—Claude already knows to be accurate, use JSON-LD, and follow Google's guidelines. Replace with a single line like 'Use JSON-LD format in <head> or end of <body>. Only markup content that actually exists on the page.'
Integrate validation as an explicit step in the implementation workflow, e.g., '1. Identify page type → 2. Write JSON-LD → 3. Validate with Rich Results Test → 4. If errors, fix and re-validate → 5. Deploy only when passing.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill includes some unnecessary content like 'Core Principles' that are general best practices Claude already knows (e.g., 'accuracy first,' 'validate everything'). The 'Task-Specific Questions' section at the end is also somewhat redundant given the Initial Assessment section. However, the tables and quick references are reasonably efficient. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides a useful reference table and property lists, but the actual code examples are minimal—only one short @graph snippet with ellipses. The implementation section is vague ('Component that renders schema,' 'Use includes/partials') rather than providing executable code. It defers full JSON-LD examples to a separate file, leaving the main skill without copy-paste-ready markup. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There's a reasonable sequence implied (assess → implement → validate → deploy), and a testing checklist is provided. However, the workflow lacks explicit validation checkpoints integrated into the implementation steps—validation is in a separate section rather than embedded as a gate before deployment. No feedback loop for fixing errors is clearly sequenced. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill appropriately references external files (references/schema-examples.md) for detailed examples, keeps the main file as an overview with quick references, and provides clear navigation to related skills. The structure is well-organized with logical sections and one-level-deep references. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
2c7c108
Table of Contents
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.