Generate AggregateRating and Review schema markup. Enter ratings, review count, and author data for star-rich results.
The star ratings under search results come from markup like this tool produces. You type what you know - the item being reviewed, its average score, how many reviews that average is based on, an author - and it returns schema.org JSON-LD to paste into the page. The markup is the easy half. What surprises most users: Google renders stars only when the rating is genuine, meaning real user reviews that actually appear on the page, and it treats self-serving ratings (an entity rating its own product) as spam. The tool serializes your numbers faithfully; it cannot vouch for them.
A concrete input and expected output from the current implementation.
Input
Item name: Starlight Headlamp | Item type: Product | ratingValue: 4.8 | reviewCount: 127 | bestRating: 5
Expected output
{
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "Product",
"name": "Starlight Headlamp",
"aggregateRating": {
"@type": "AggregateRating",
"ratingValue": "4.8",
"reviewCount": "127",
"bestRating": "5",
"worstRating": "1"
}
} The tool nests the AggregateRating node inside the Product it was asked to describe, writes the average and count exactly as typed, and spells out bestRating and worstRating so the 1-5 scale is explicit to any parser rather than assumed.
The form's core decision is nesting: AggregateRating and Review nodes are placed inside the node for the reviewed entity - Product, Service, Book, Recipe, and similar types - never as loose siblings. Search parsers read that containment to decide what the stars describe, which is why the tool asks for the item's name and type rather than treating them as cosmetic.
The tool performs no averaging, rounding, or cross-checking. The ratingValue you type is emitted exactly, and reviewCount is emitted as an integer. A 5.0 average typed alongside four-star reviews is still serialized as typed; consistency between the markup, the reviews on the page, and the real-world count is entirely your responsibility.
No. The markup is necessary but not sufficient: Google shows review snippets only when genuine user reviews appear on the page, and it disqualifies self-serving reviews and local-business pages (since 2019). Run the output through Google's Rich Results Test to confirm it parses, and remember that search-result features change over time.
Schema.org allows any scale when bestRating and worstRating are explicit, so a ratingValue of 8.6 with bestRating 10 is valid schema. Google's review-snippet guidance describes the 1-5 scale its star rendering expects, so nonstandard scales are unlikely to render as stars. The tool writes whichever bounds you enter; whether Google honors them is a separate question.
The example and behavioral notes were checked against the browser implementation. Standards and primary references below define the relevant format, formula, or platform behavior.
Shorten URLs with local redirect tracking via localStorage. See click counts and generate a QR code for each link.
Build UTM-tagged URLs for campaign tracking with source, medium, campaign, term, and content parameters.
Enter 2+ headlines and see simulated previews in Google results, email subject lines, and social posts side-by-side.
Count characters for Twitter/X, LinkedIn, Facebook, and Instagram with platform-specific limits and warnings.
Calculate click-through rates from impressions and clicks with industry benchmarks and trend analysis.
Check email subject line length against best practices for desktop and mobile with preview text optimization.