Descriptions that read like keyword lists
In the reportMeta descriptions use keyword-list formatting
meta_description_keyword_list · Review item
This appears when a page's meta description is built like a list: at least one separator — a comma, semicolon, | or • — for every two words, at least four parts, and nothing that ends a sentence. Rewrite it as one or two plain sentences about the page. The check looks at punctuation, not at whether the words are relevant.
Severity: Low. Handle it when you next revise descriptions; a list-shaped description does not keep a page out of search.
Why it matters
Google builds snippets mainly from the page's own content, and sometimes uses the meta description when it describes the page more accurately. Its guidance warns that descriptions made of long strings of keywords do not give people a clear idea of the page and are less likely to be shown, and it gives a comma-separated keyword list as its bad example.
What to do
- Open the page's meta description or SEO-description field and write one or two sentences that say what the page offers, as you would to a customer.
- If descriptions are filled automatically from tags or keywords, ask your developer to change the template to use a written summary instead.
- Check again with this one address once the new description is published.
When to leave it as it is: if the description is a list on purpose, for example product details that help a buyer, and it reads well in a result, you can leave it. The check looks only at punctuation and cannot tell a useful list from a keyword list.
What we read
We read the first <meta name="description"> in the HTML each page returned, without running JavaScript. This check also measures pages marked noindex and pages that ask for no snippet. An empty or missing description is left to the missing-description check, and a page whose HTML was not captured in full is not measured.
Only four characters count as separators: the comma, the semicolon, | and •. A description is reported when all three hold: it has at least one separator for every two words, it splits into at least four non-empty parts, and it contains none of ., ?, ! or their East Asian forms 。, ？ and ！. So a description with a single full stop, even one inside a web address, is not reported.
Example & evidence
Illustrative example — one page, not a live audit.
Address: https://bakery.example/cakes/
The description we read:
<meta name="description" content="bread, sourdough, cakes, pastries, bakery london">It has six words and four commas, more than one separator for every two words. The commas split it into five parts, and nothing ends a sentence, so all three signs are present.
A possible correction:
<meta name="description" content="Fresh sourdough, cakes and pastries, baked every morning in our London bakery.">It is now a sentence: it ends with a full stop, and two commas across twelve words are far from one for every two.
Confirm & check again
Check for yourself: view the page source and find the description. Count its commas, semicolons, | and • against its words: with one for every two words, at least four parts and none of ., ?, !, 。, ？ or ！, the check reports it.
Check again: Full audit — re-read this address only and measure its fresh description; the page must answer 200 with HTML. If the description has been removed, this check cannot conclude, and the next full audit settles it.
Limits & sources
The check measures the shape of the description, not whether its words are relevant, accurate or the right length. Lists split by other marks, such as / or a dash, are not measured as lists, and a description containing a full stop is not reported.
Confidence: Medium because punctuation is a sign of a keyword list, not proof; the finding records the counts so you can judge the wording.
Sources
- Google, Control your snippets in search results — warns that descriptions made of long strings of keywords are less likely to be shown and gives a keyword list as its bad example. Checked 25 September 2026.
Editorial review: 29 September 2026