Schema.org JSON-LD Generator
Generate Schema.org structured data in JSON-LD format
About This Tool
Hand-writing JSON-LD structured data for a webpage means consulting Schema.org docs, copying examples, and inevitably forgetting a required field that costs you a rich result.
This generator handles the schemas that actually matter for SEO: Organization, LocalBusiness, Product, Article, BreadcrumbList, FAQPage, HowTo, Recipe, Event, JobPosting, and VideoObject. Pick a type, fill in the fields (with required ones flagged), and get valid JSON-LD ready to paste into your <head>.
The Google Rich Results Test is what your output gets validated against. The generator produces schema that passes that test, which is what determines whether you actually get the rich snippet. Schema.org has many more types than the ones here, but most aren't recognized by search engines for rich results — covering them isn't worth the complexity.
The schema vocabulary is published by Schema.org, an industry consortium founded by Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, and Yandex. It defines hundreds of types and thousands of properties. Most aren't recognized by search engines for visible features. Google has a documented list of 'rich result' types — Article, Product, Recipe, Event, JobPosting, FAQPage, HowTo, BreadcrumbList, LocalBusiness, Organization, VideoObject, and a few more — that actually trigger enhanced search appearance. Schemas outside this list are valid but produce no visible benefit, which is why the generator focuses on the small set that pays off.
The pain this addresses: hand-writing JSON-LD by reading Schema.org docs, copying examples, and inevitably forgetting required fields. Each rich result type has specific required and recommended properties. Miss a required field and Google's Rich Results Test rejects the schema. Miss a recommended one and it might pass validation but not display. The generator marks required fields with red, recommended with yellow, optional with gray, so you can fill the right ones without consulting docs every time.
Worked example: an Article schema for a blog post. Required fields: headline, image, datePublished, author. Generator output: ```json { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "Article", "headline": "Setting Up Postgres on a Pi", "image": "https://example.com/hero.jpg", "datePublished": "2024-03-15", "author": {"@type": "Person", "name": "Jane Doe"}, "publisher": {"@type": "Organization", "name": "Example Site", "logo": {"@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://example.com/logo.png"}} } ``` This passes Google's Rich Results Test and qualifies for the article rich result, which can show in search with byline and date.
Where schema markup misleads people: thinking it improves rankings. It doesn't, directly. What it does is enable rich results — visual enhancements in search that often increase click-through rate from the same ranking position. So the indirect effect on traffic is real, but treating schema as a ranking lever leads to over-investment in schema and under-investment in actual content quality. Get the schema right; don't expect it to compensate for thin content. The two effects are independent.
The about text and FAQ on this page were drafted with AI assistance and reviewed by a member of the Coherence Daddy team before publishing. See our Content Policy for editorial standards.