Schema Markup & Structured Data workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs Design, validate, and optimize schema.org structured data for eligibility, correctness, and measurable SEO impact and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing off.
Instalar com Codex ou Claude Copie este prompt, cole no Codex, Claude ou outro assistente e deixe que ele revise a página da skill e instale para você.
Um comando direto ignora o prompt de revisão. Verifique a origem antes de executá-lo.
Schema Markup & Structured Data workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs Design, validate, and optimize schema.org structured data for eligibility, correctness, and measurable SEO impact and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing off.
This public intake copy packages plugins/antigravity-bundle-seo-specialist/skills/schema-markup from https://github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills into the native Omni Skills editorial shape without hiding its origin.
Use it when the operator needs the upstream workflow, support files, and repository context to stay intact while the public validator and private enhancer continue their normal downstream flow.
This intake keeps the copied upstream files intact and uses the external_source block in metadata.json plus ORIGIN.md as the provenance anchor for review.
Schema Markup & Structured Data You are an expert in structured data and schema markup with a focus on Google rich result eligibility, accuracy, and impact. Your responsibility is to: - Determine whether schema markup is appropriate - Identify which schema types are valid and eligible - Prevent invalid, misleading, or spammy markup - Design maintainable, correct JSON-LD - Avoid over-markup that creates false expectations You do not guarantee rich results. You do not add schema that misrepresents content. ---
Imported source sections that did not map cleanly to the public headings are still preserved below or in the support files. Notable imported sections: Phase 1: Page & Goal Assessment, Supported & Common Schema Types, Multiple Schema Types per Page, Validation & Testing, Implementation Guidance, Output Format (Required).
When to Use This Skill
Use this section as the trigger filter. It should make the activation boundary explicit before the operator loads files, runs commands, or opens a pull request.
This skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview.
Use when the request clearly matches the imported source intent: Design, validate, and optimize schema.org structured data for eligibility, correctness, and measurable SEO impact.
Use when the operator should preserve upstream workflow detail instead of rewriting the process from scratch.
Use when provenance needs to stay visible in the answer, PR, or review packet.
Use when copied upstream references, examples, or scripts materially improve the answer.
Use when the workflow should remain reviewable in the public intake repo before the private enhancer takes over.
Operating Table
Situation
Start here
Why it matters
First-time use
metadata.json
Confirms repository, branch, commit, and imported path through the block before touching the copied workflow
external_source
Provenance review
ORIGIN.md
Gives reviewers a plain-language audit trail for the imported source
Workflow execution
SKILL.md
Starts with the smallest copied file that materially changes execution
Supporting context
SKILL.md
Adds the next most relevant copied source file without loading the entire package
Handoff decision
## Related Skills
Helps the operator switch to a stronger native skill when the task drifts
Workflow
This workflow is intentionally editorial and operational at the same time. It keeps the imported source useful to the operator while still satisfying the public intake standards that feed the downstream enhancer flow.
Confirm the user goal, the scope of the imported workflow, and whether this skill is still the right router for the task.
Read the overview and provenance files before loading any copied upstream support files.
Load only the references, examples, prompts, or scripts that materially change the outcome for the current request.
Execute the upstream workflow while keeping provenance and source boundaries explicit in the working notes.
Validate the result against the upstream expectations and the evidence you can point to in the copied files.
Escalate or hand off to a related skill when the work moves out of this imported workflow's center of gravity.
Before merge or closure, record what was used, what changed, and what the reviewer still needs to verify.
Imported Workflow Notes
Imported: Phase 1: Page & Goal Assessment
(Proceed only if score ≥ 70)
1. Page Type
What kind of page is this?
Primary content entity
Single-entity vs multi-entity page
2. Current State
Existing schema present?
Errors or warnings?
Rich results currently shown?
3. Objective
Which rich result (if any) is targeted?
Expected benefit (CTR, clarity, trust)
Is schema necessary to achieve this?
Examples
Example 1: Ask for the upstream workflow directly
Use @schema-markup-v3 to handle <task>. Start from the copied upstream workflow, load only the files that change the outcome, and keep provenance visible in the answer.
Explanation: This is the safest starting point when the operator needs the imported workflow, but not the entire repository.
Example 2: Ask for a provenance-grounded review
Review @schema-markup-v3 against metadata.json and ORIGIN.md, then explain which copied upstream files you would load first and why.
Explanation: Use this before review or troubleshooting when you need a precise, auditable explanation of origin and file selection.
Example 3: Narrow the copied support files before execution
Use @schema-markup-v3 for <task>. Load only the copied references, examples, or scripts that change the outcome, and name the files explicitly before proceeding.
Explanation: This keeps the skill aligned with progressive disclosure instead of loading the whole copied package by default.
Example 4: Build a reviewer packet
Review @schema-markup-v3 using the copied upstream files plus provenance, then summarize any gaps before merge.
Explanation: This is useful when the PR is waiting for human review and you want a repeatable audit packet.
Best Practices
Treat the generated public skill as a reviewable packaging layer around the upstream repository. The goal is to keep provenance explicit and load only the copied source material that materially improves execution.
Schema must match visible content exactly
Do not “add content for schema”
Remove schema if content is removed
Follow Google rich result documentation
Schema.org allows more than Google supports
Unsupported types provide minimal SEO value
Add only schema that serves a clear purpose
Imported Operating Notes
Imported: Core Principles (Non-Negotiable)
1. Accuracy Over Ambition
Schema must match visible content exactly
Do not “add content for schema”
Remove schema if content is removed
2. Google First, Schema.org Second
Follow Google rich result documentation
Schema.org allows more than Google supports
Unsupported types provide minimal SEO value
3. Minimal, Purposeful Markup
Add only schema that serves a clear purpose
Avoid redundant or decorative markup
More schema ≠ better SEO
4. Continuous Validation
Validate before deployment
Monitor Search Console enhancements
Fix errors promptly
Troubleshooting
Problem: The operator skipped the imported context and answered too generically
Symptoms: The result ignores the upstream workflow in plugins/antigravity-bundle-seo-specialist/skills/schema-markup, fails to mention provenance, or does not use any copied source files at all.
Solution: Re-open metadata.json, ORIGIN.md, and the most relevant copied upstream files. Check the external_source block first, then restate the provenance before continuing.
Problem: The imported workflow feels incomplete during review
Symptoms: Reviewers can see the generated SKILL.md, but they cannot quickly tell which references, examples, or scripts matter for the current task.
Solution: Point at the exact copied references, examples, scripts, or assets that justify the path you took. If the gap is still real, record it in the PR instead of hiding it.
Problem: The task drifted into a different specialization
Symptoms: The imported skill starts in the right place, but the work turns into debugging, architecture, design, security, or release orchestration that a native skill handles better.
Solution: Use the related skills section to hand off deliberately. Keep the imported provenance visible so the next skill inherits the right context instead of starting blind.
Related Skills
@competitive-landscape-v3 - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
@competitor-alternatives-v3 - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
@copywriting-v3 - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
@cpp-pro-v3 - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.
Additional Resources
Use this support matrix and the linked files below as the operator packet for this imported skill. They should reflect real copied source material, not generic scaffolding.
Resource family
What it gives the reviewer
Example path
references
copied reference notes, guides, or background material from upstream
references/n/a
examples
worked examples or reusable prompts copied from upstream
examples/n/a
scripts
upstream helper scripts that change execution or validation
scripts/n/a
agents
routing or delegation notes that are genuinely part of the imported package
agents/n/a
assets
supporting assets or schemas copied from the source package
assets/n/a
Imported Reference Notes
Imported: Phase 0: Schema Eligibility & Impact Index (Required)
Before writing or modifying schema, calculate the Schema Eligibility & Impact Index.
Purpose
The index answers:
Is schema markup justified here, and is it likely to produce measurable benefit?
Imported: 🔢 Schema Eligibility & Impact Index
Total Score: 0–100
This is a diagnostic score, not a promise of rich results.
Scoring Categories & Weights
Category
Weight
Content–Schema Alignment
25
Rich Result Eligibility (Google)
25
Data Completeness & Accuracy
20
Technical Correctness
15
Maintenance & Sustainability
10
Spam / Policy Risk
5
Total
100
Category Definitions
1. Content–Schema Alignment (0–25)
Schema reflects visible, user-facing content
Marked entities actually exist on the page
No hidden or implied content
Automatic failure if schema describes content not shown.
2. Rich Result Eligibility (0–25)
Schema type is supported by Google
Page meets documented eligibility requirements
No known disqualifying patterns (e.g. self-serving reviews)
3. Data Completeness & Accuracy (0–20)
All required properties present
Values are correct, current, and formatted properly
No placeholders or fabricated data
4. Technical Correctness (0–15)
Valid JSON-LD
Correct nesting and types
No syntax, enum, or formatting errors
5. Maintenance & Sustainability (0–10)
Data can be kept in sync with content
Updates won’t break schema
Suitable for templates if scaled
6. Spam / Policy Risk (0–5)
No deceptive intent
No over-markup
No attempt to game rich results
Eligibility Bands (Required)
Score
Verdict
Interpretation
85–100
Strong Candidate
Schema is appropriate and low risk
70–84
Valid but Limited
Use selectively, expect modest impact
55–69
High Risk
Implement only with strict controls
<55
Do Not Implement
Likely invalid or harmful
If verdict is Do Not Implement, stop and explain why.
Imported: Supported & Common Schema Types
(Only implement when eligibility criteria are met.)
Organization
Use for: brand entity (homepage or about page)
WebSite (+ SearchAction)
Use for: enabling sitelinks search box
Article / BlogPosting
Use for: editorial content with authorship
Product
Use for: real purchasable products
Must show price, availability, and offers visibly
SoftwareApplication
Use for: SaaS apps and tools
FAQPage
Use only when:
Questions and answers are visible
Not used for promotional content
Not user-generated without moderation
HowTo
Use only for:
Genuine step-by-step instructional content
Not marketing funnels
BreadcrumbList
Use whenever breadcrumbs exist visually
LocalBusiness
Use for: real, physical business locations
Review / AggregateRating
Strict rules:
Reviews must be genuine
No self-serving reviews
Ratings must match visible content
Event
Use for: real events with clear dates and availability
