Skip to main content

Ad Copy Compliance Checker

What it does

The Ad Copy Compliance Checker scans Google Ads headlines and descriptions for the language patterns that most often trigger auto-disapproval — superlatives like “#1” and “best”, generic CTAs like “click here”, repeated punctuation, ALL CAPS, unverifiable urgency claims, and other policy violations. Each issue is flagged by severity (high = likely auto-rejection, medium = ad strength penalty), with a clear explanation of which rule the copy is hitting.

Common situations

A new ad has been disapproved with a generic policy notice and you don’t know which line is the problem. Paste the headlines and descriptions; the checker flags the specific patterns that match Google’s known rules.

You’re producing copy for a client and want to verify it’ll pass policy review before they sign off. The checker catches the obvious violations (superlatives, capitalisation, repeated punctuation) before submission, saving the disapproval-fix cycle.

A campaign that was running has suddenly seen ads disapproved after a Google policy update. Run the existing copy through the checker — recent updates have tightened rules around superlatives and outcome guarantees, and ads that previously passed may now violate.

You’re writing ads in a regulated industry (legal, medical, financial) where policy is stricter. The checker doesn’t replace human review against the specific industry policy, but catches the cross-industry violations (urgency, guarantees, generic CTAs) that would fail anywhere.

You’re auditing copy a freelancer or AI tool produced. The checker reveals the patterns that look reasonable to a human writer but trip Google’s automated checks — common when copy is written for general advertising rather than for paid search specifically.

What you need to know

Google Ads’ policy review uses both automated pattern matching and human review. The automated layer catches the obvious patterns: prohibited words, repeated punctuation, ALL CAPS, character limit violations. Once auto-rejected, an ad doesn’t run; appeal requires editing the offending element. Repeated auto-rejections on the same account can flag the account for tighter scrutiny.

The patterns the checker flags break down into two severity tiers:

High severity (likely auto-rejection):

  • Generic CTAs (“click here”, “submit”, “go”) — Google’s policy is that ads should describe what the user gets, not just what to do.
  • Outcome guarantees (“guaranteed”, “guaranteed results”) — most categories require independent verification of guarantees, and vague guarantees in regulated industries (medical, financial, legal) are auto-rejected.
  • Superlatives without verification (“#1”, “best”, “no.1”, “number one”) — claims of being the “top” require independent third-party verification (industry awards, certified rankings). Internal claims auto-reject.
  • Health/outcome claims (“cure”, “miracle”, “instant”) — heavily restricted across most categories.
  • Excessive punctuation (!!!, ???, repeated $$$) — auto-detected pattern.
  • Character overruns — over 30 chars headlines, over 90 chars descriptions, over 15 chars display paths. Ads with overruns can’t be submitted.

Medium severity (won’t auto-reject but reduces ad strength and trust signals):

  • ALL CAPS over 4 characters — works for acronyms (USA, NHS) but otherwise penalised. ALL CAPS reads as shouting and reduces ad strength scoring.
  • Hyperbole (“amazing”, “incredible”, “stunning”) — not policy violations but reduce ad relevance because they’re noise rather than substance.
  • Comparative superlatives without proof (“best”, “top”, “greatest”) — same issue as the high-severity superlatives but case-by-case enforcement.
  • Repeated punctuation under threshold (!!, ??) — reduces ad strength.
  • Urgency claims (“limited time”, “act now”, “hurry”) — the rule is the urgency must be demonstrably true at the destination. If the landing page doesn’t show a countdown or expiry, the urgency claim violates policy.

What the checker doesn’t cover:

  • Industry-specific restrictions (e.g. cryptocurrency, gambling, healthcare, financial services). Each category has its own policy with prohibited terms specific to it.
  • Trademark issues. Google Ads trademark policy is complex and case-by-case; competitor brand mentions can be allowed or prohibited depending on the trademark holder’s preferences.
  • Local legal restrictions. Some claims are restricted in specific jurisdictions even when allowed globally.
  • Editorial quality. The checker is policy-focused; whether the copy actually performs is a separate question.

For ads in heavily-regulated industries, this checker is a starting point — Google’s Advertising Policies is the canonical reference and should be reviewed for category-specific rules.

Frequently asked questions

Why was my ad disapproved with no specific reason?

Google’s auto-rejection notices often cite “Misleading Content” or “Unacceptable Business Practice” without naming the specific phrase that triggered the rule. The checker’s pattern list covers the most common triggers — start there before appealing or rewriting.

Can I use “free” in my ad?

Yes, if the offer is unconditionally true at the destination. “Free shipping over £50” is fine. “Free trial” is fine if the trial really is free with no hidden charges. “Free” claims that aren’t unconditionally true at the destination violate policy.

What about superlatives like “best”?

Superlative claims require independent third-party verification — an industry award, certified ranking, or comparable third-party source. Internal “best in our team” claims auto-reject. If you have legitimate third-party recognition, citing it specifically (e.g. “Voted Best Software 2025 by [Publication]”) is allowed.

Can I use ALL CAPS for emphasis?

Acronyms only (USA, BBC, NHS, NASA). General ALL CAPS for emphasis (“FREE SHIPPING”) is treated as shouting and reduces ad strength scoring. It rarely auto-rejects but consistently reduces performance.

Does the checker know about industry-specific rules?

No — the checker covers cross-industry policy patterns. Industry-specific restrictions (cryptocurrency, gambling, healthcare claims, financial advice) have their own rules that need category-specific review. Google’s policy centre is the canonical source per category.

What’s the difference between “limited time” being OK and not OK?

If the offer really is time-limited and the landing page reflects it (countdown timer, expiry date visible), the urgency claim is fine. If the landing page has no time element, the urgency in the ad violates the “claims must be demonstrably true at destination” rule.

Are emojis allowed in Google Ads?

Limited. Most emojis are stripped or auto-rejected. Some symbols (✓, ★) are tolerated. The safe pattern is to avoid all non-ASCII characters in headlines unless you’ve tested they pass review.

How do I appeal an auto-rejection?

Submit the appeal in Google Ads UI under the disapproval notice. Most appeals fail unless you’ve explicitly fixed the violation; resubmitting unchanged copy doesn’t usually work. Identify the specific pattern, fix it, then resubmit.

Common problems

Problem: Ad approved last week is now disapproved without changes.

Google’s policy and auto-detection rules update continuously. An ad that passed when submitted may fail after a rule update — most commonly when the rules around superlatives, urgency, or industry-specific terms tighten. Run the existing copy through the checker; if it now flags issues, that’s the cause.

Problem: Checker flags an issue but Google approved the ad.

False positive on the heuristic side. The checker uses pattern matching; Google uses pattern matching plus human review plus context. Some flags are advisory rather than guaranteed rejections — the checker errs on the side of warning so you can make an informed call.

Problem: Checker passes but ad is still rejected.

The checker covers cross-industry patterns. Industry-specific rules (especially in regulated categories) and trademark issues aren’t in the pattern set. Review Google’s policy centre for the category and check trademark restrictions on competitor terms.

Problem: Generic CTA flag triggered on legitimate copy.

“Click here” is the canonical generic CTA flag. “Learn more”, “Find out”, “Discover” are usually fine if context makes the destination clear. If the checker’s regex hits a false positive, ignore the flag — but verify the copy reads as informative rather than instruction-only.

Problem: Account has many ads being auto-rejected systematically.

Pattern matching across the account’s ad copy usually reveals the systematic issue — same template-derived headlines that all share the offending pattern. Audit the templates rather than fixing per-ad.

Tips

  • Test copy through the checker before bulk uploading. Catching one violation pattern that affects 50 ads is much faster than fixing 50 disapprovals individually.
  • Avoid superlatives unless you have third-party verification. The cost of dropping “#1” from a headline is minor; the cost of repeated auto-rejection is account scrutiny.
  • If urgency claims are core to your campaign, ensure the landing page reinforces them (countdown, expiry date, “limited stock” indicator). Without that, urgency in ad copy violates policy.
  • Audit existing campaigns periodically. Policy updates can disapprove previously-running ads; proactive auditing catches them before performance dips.
  • For regulated industries, review Google’s category-specific policies rather than relying on cross-industry pattern matching alone.

Related tools in this suite

The RSA Tester handles the format-and-character-limit side of compliance; the compliance checker handles the language-and-policy side. The two together cover most pre-launch validation needs.

What this looks like at scale

For a single ad, the checker is sufficient. For an account producing dozens of ads weekly, compliance should be templated — headlines and descriptions drawn from approved patterns rather than written ad-hoc. The paid search service covers the structural side of consistent compliance across larger campaigns.

Take it further

If your account has been hit with disapprovals across many campaigns, the structural fix is usually templates and disciplines that prevent the offending patterns from being introduced in the first place. Start a conversation about what auditing and remediating looks like.