Open Graph Checker

Check Open Graph tags, conflicting values and image groups on one public page. Review source findings before verifying the actual share.

An Open Graph checker helps explain why a shared page has the wrong title, missing metadata or an unexpected image declaration. Screpy reads one public page's HTML and shows its Open Graph tags, conflicts and image groups. Use that evidence to fix the published source, then check the image file and the actual sharing platform separately. The preview here illustrates declared values; it does not reproduce a social network's card.

How to use the Open Graph Checker

Enter the complete public URL of the page you plan to share, including the path, and submit it. Checking a homepage does not inspect its articles or product pages. Read the Final URL first: if your address redirects, the report describes that destination. Use the Redirect Checker when the destination is unexpected.

Review the property table in source order. Each row shows the declaration, its value and a source line when available. Open image groups to inspect their associated fields, then read the findings and their suggested corrections.

Red highlights missing required values or rejected URL values. Amber marks conflicting values or partial coverage. Green means these supported checks found no issue in a complete retained report. It does not confirm that an image loads, that the copy suits the page or that a platform will display the intended card.

Check the four required Open Graph properties

The Open Graph protocol defines four basic required properties. Review their meaning as well as their presence:

Property What to check on this page
og:title A clear sharing title for this specific page, without stale campaign text.
og:type The intended kind of object, such as website or article.
og:image The address of the image you intend to associate with the page.
og:url The stable address intended to identify this sharing object.

Screpy's presence check needs at least one nonblank retained declaration for each exact property name. A filled og:type passes presence even if its value is inappropriate; this tool does not validate the type's vocabulary or all type-specific requirements.

Add a useful og:description that explains the page without repeating the headline. Its absence does not trigger the four-property missing check. An HTML <title> or ordinary meta description is a separate declaration: do not assume it fills an empty Open Graph field in this report.

Fix missing and conflicting tags

A missing-property finding means the required name is absent from the retained rows or every matching value is blank. Check both spelling and content before adding another tag. The checker matches lowercase names such as og:title; differently written names can miss that check.

A conflict means different raw values appear for og:title, og:type, og:url or og:description. Even a whitespace difference counts. Identical repeats do not trigger this conflict warning, although unnecessary repeated output still deserves cleanup.

For example, a fictional page could publish an empty og:title followed by og:title containing “Atlas walking routes”. The later value satisfies the presence check, but the illustrative preview uses the first value and stays blank. The different values also produce a conflict. A missing warning and a blank preview therefore answer different questions.

Find which CMS field, theme or template produces each row. Correct the responsible output so the intended value is delivered once for these single-value fields. Adding a third declaration hides neither original. Keep intentional repeated image declarations for the separate image-group review below.

Keep image properties with the right image

Several og:image declarations can be intentional. Put each image's structured properties immediately after its root declaration and before the next image. This fictional head fragment demonstrates the association; it is not a complete metadata set:

<meta property="og:image" content="https://example.com/media/route-map.jpg">
<meta property="og:image:width" content="1200">
<meta property="og:image:height" content="627">
<meta property="og:image:alt" content="Map of the Atlas walking route">
<meta property="og:image" content="https://example.com/media/trail.jpg">
<meta property="og:image:alt" content="Footpath beside a wooded hillside">

The first group declares a map with dimensions and alternative text. The second has its own description and no declared dimensions. Moving the second alt field above its root would attach it to the map instead. These values describe the source; Screpy neither downloads the files nor measures whether the map really has those dimensions.

Fields placed before any image root may appear in the raw table without an image-group association. Use the ordered source to repair them. If coverage is partial, verify the complete head before trusting the retained grouping.

The protocol treats og:image:url as an alias for og:image. Screpy recognizes the alias for grouping and preview selection, but its current required-property check still expects an explicit nonblank og:image. An alias-only page can therefore show an image URL and a missing-property finding together; that finding is a checker limitation, not proof that the alias is forbidden.

Separate URL checks from image and platform checks

The URL check covers og:url, og:image, og:image:url and og:image:secure_url. It tries to resolve their values as HTTP or HTTPS addresses against the final page URL. It does not apply an HTML <base> address or validate every audio and video URL.

A relative value can pass this check while pointing to the wrong file. If the final page is https://example.com/guides/route/, images/map.jpg resolves under /guides/route/, not the site's /images/ directory. Use the full intended HTTPS address when possible to make the destination unambiguous. Passing URL syntax is still not evidence that the file exists.

Open the intended image separately and check that visitors can access it without signing in. Inspect its actual dimensions, file size and contents; changing og:image:width does not resize it. For example, LinkedIn's sharing-module requirements specify a minimum of 1200 × 627 pixels, a maximum file size of 5 MB and a recommended ratio of 1.91:1. These are LinkedIn requirements, not universal Open Graph limits or measurements performed here. A protected image can remain unavailable even when its dimensions fit.

Also distinguish og:url from <link rel="canonical">. The former identifies the sharing object; the latter expresses a search canonical preference. Check the latter with the Canonical Tag Checker. As Google's canonical guidance explains, preference signals do not guarantee Google's selected URL.

Verify the published fix and report coverage

Update the responsible CMS field or template, publish the change and submit the same page again. Compare the final URL, property order and findings with the earlier report. Tags inserted only after JavaScript runs are outside this check: inspect the HTML delivered by the page, not just a browser's modified document.

Read coverage before treating a missing row as an absent tag. Screpy retains up to 200 Open Graph declarations and 20 image groups. A partial report can omit later declarations and cannot establish every image association. Check the complete source before removing or adding tags on that evidence alone. Values are also shortened to 4096 UTF-16 units; that shortening alone does not trigger the partial label, so inspect unusually long values in the source.

Export the JSON report to preserve the observed declarations and findings. If the check cannot complete, the result is unavailable; it does not mean the page has passed. After correcting the source and inspecting the actual image, verify a real share on the intended platform. Use the Meta Tag Analyzer when you also need to review ordinary title, description and other head declarations.

Open Graph Checker questions

Check Open Graph tags, conflicting values and image groups on one public page. Review source findings before verifying the actual share.

What does this Open Graph Checker inspect?

It reads Open Graph declarations from one public page's HTML head. The report shows ordered values, source lines when available, missing required properties, conflicting values, selected URL checks and image groups. It does not crawl the whole website.

Does a green result mean the sharing image works?

No. Green means the supported checks found no issue in a complete retained report. Images are not downloaded, measured or rendered. Check the actual file and the intended platform separately.

Why does og:image:url still produce a missing-image finding?

The protocol permits og:image:url as an og:image alias. This checker recognizes it for grouping and preview selection, but its current required-property check expects an explicit nonblank og:image. The finding alone does not prove the alias is invalid.

Should I remove every repeated og:image tag?

No. Several image declarations can be intentional. Keep each image's structured properties after its root and before the next root. The conflict warning concerns differing title, type, URL or description values, not every repeated image.

Why is the preview blank when a title is present?

The illustrative preview uses the first retained og:title value, even if it is blank. A later nonblank title can satisfy the presence check while the preview stays blank. Different raw values also cause a conflict warning.

Are JavaScript-generated tags and all website pages checked?

No. The tool reads the HTML returned for the submitted page without executing its scripts. Submit each relevant public page separately. Partial reports and shortened values require checking the complete source before drawing conclusions.