Fix AMP errors and validate the published page
Read the conclusion first
Investigate AMP only if your site actually maintains AMP URLs. Decide whether to keep and repair them or retire them through a planned migration. A missing AMP report is not a reason to create AMP pages, and a valid AMP document does not guarantee ranking or search distribution.
Applicable conditions
Applies to sites actually maintaining AMP; non-AMP sites can skip this.
Before you open the report
The ordinary canonical URL, linked AMP URL if present, and both rendered pages and responses.
Use one concrete URL or report first. Keep account credentials and private visitor data out of shared notes.
Steps and verification
Inventory real AMP and canonical pairs
Find AMP links in current pages and sitemap records, then open the actual AMP URLs and their canonical counterparts. Record final responses, page purpose and whether both versions contain the required information and functions. Old template references may point to retired files.
Confirm the business still needs both versions. Separate a broken association from an absent optional implementation. Preserve real incoming URLs before deciding to remove files, so retirement does not silently break bookmarked or linked content.
Repair the exact validation or resource failure
Use a current supported AMP validation method and keep the actual error, URL and deployment date. Check markup, allowed components, resources and the relationship with the canonical page. Verify visible content and user actions after the code passes.
Removing the component named in an error may make validation pass while deleting the reader's video, form or answer. Where a feature cannot be maintained, choose a deliberate alternative and document the tradeoff rather than calling a stripped page fully restored.
Keep or retire with a checked URL plan
For retained AMP pages, verify the pair's canonical/alternate relationship, public delivery and supported user functions. For retirement, plan equivalent destinations, redirects and removal of obsolete AMP references according to official migration guidance.
Test original incoming URLs and the final ordinary pages on mobile. Record implementation and later Google processing separately. The useful outcome is reliable access to the same reader task, not a green report achieved by deleting evidence or creating unnecessary duplicate pages.
Common mistake: Think AMP is a ranking requirement
It is not an implementation method that all websites must adopt.
How to decide when you encounter different situations
Match your actual observation to a row before changing the page. If it does not match, collect the missing evidence first.
| What you see | Next step | How to confirm |
|---|---|---|
| No AMP pages | Skip inapplicable work | Not a missing feature failure |
| AMP and canonical page inconsistent | Check association and body content | Both versions actually open |
| Preparing to disable AMP | Plan old URLs and redirects | Don't just delete resource files |
Review AMP only when an AMP version actually exists
Teaching scenario. Names, URLs and numbers illustrate the method; they are not customer or measured site results.
- What you observe
- Example: the ordinary article is current, but its linked AMP version shows an older answer and a broken image.
- What it establishes
- The relation is not enough when the versions no longer match. A site without AMP needs no invented AMP repair task.
- What to do next
- If retaining AMP, update the correct source and validate the actual alternate URL. If retiring it, plan redirects and remove obsolete relations rather than deleting resources blindly.
What counts as a checked result
Open both versions as a visitor, compare core answers and links, and retain the relevant validation result.
If a required check fails, keep the error and return to the matching decision branch. A blank record means unverified, not passed.
Leave with a checked result, not another vague instruction
- Your deliverable
- A keep-or-retire decision preserving the same task on valid reachable URLs.
- Stop and resolve this first
- Do not delete a working feature merely because its component causes a validator warning.
Record missing evidence in the worksheet below. An unresolved test is useful information; a blank field is not a pass.
Checklist for this page
Fill in your own check results, then decide the next step. Blank means not yet verified, not normal. Content is saved only in the current local session and is not submitted to the server or AI.
Frequently asked questions
Is there anything to fix if there's no AMP report?
When AMP is not used, it usually isn't a pending fix item.
Is AMP required for every article?
No. Decide based on the actual site architecture and requirements. Maintain healthy ordinary pages regardless.
Official materials and usage boundaries
This page provides operational judgment and checking methods, and does not show customer success cases. Calculation examples and request samples are teaching materials, not actual website metrics. Google's reports, conditions, and interfaces may change; please refer to the current official documentation.
Read the corresponding Google official documentationContinue with the relevant tool
Create a dated AMP repair task with the failing example and deployed fix. Google's AMP validation remains the source for the report outcome.
See how it works →