Selective solicitation
A neutral message can still be review gating when only high scorers or hand-picked customers receive the public link.
Free tool · Browser-only · No signup
Audit the request before it reaches your customers.
Paste the exact Google review request, describe who receives it and how staff use it, then check for incentives, gating, rating pressure, content coaching, and other published policy risks.
Request under review / 01
Paste the exact customer-facing copy.
Delivery channel
Who receives the public-review link?
Is any benefit offered for the review?
Does the customer have space to respond privately?
How are staff measured?
Who is being asked to review?
Are customers told what or whom to mention?
Desk verdict / 02
No obvious policy conflicts found
Looks neutral
looks neutral
This is a plain-language screening tool, not legal advice or a guarantee about Google enforcement. It checks published policy signals and the workflow answers you provide.
No obvious conflicts detected
Keep the documented workflow consistent in practice. A neutral message can still become selective if staff only send it to customers expected to be positive.
What is working
- The wording explicitly invites honest feedback.
- Recipients are selected by an objective eligibility rule, not expected sentiment.
- No incentive is attached to posting, editing, or removing a review.
- The request follows a completed experience without staff watching.
- Staff are measured on process rather than review outcomes.
- The workflow is limited to genuine customer experiences.
- Customers choose their own rating and review content.
Neutral baseline
Thanks for choosing North Street Studio. Would you share an honest Google review? [Google review link] Thank you.
Runs entirely in your browserChecks copy and workflowBased on published Google policy
Copy is only half the audit
A polite message can hide a gated process.
Google allows merchants to encourage reviews that represent genuine experiences. The same policy prohibits incentives, discouraging negative feedback, selectively soliciting positive reviews, pressure while customers are on the premises, staff review quotas, and requests for specific content.
That means an SMS saying “share honest feedback” is not enough evidence by itself. If an automation reveals the Google link only after a four- or five-star survey response, the workflow remains selective. If staff bonuses depend on public ratings, the visible wording does not remove the pressure.
This checker evaluates both layers. It identifies obvious language, then asks the operational questions a copy-only scanner cannot infer.
Rating and content influence
The tool flags requests for five stars, positive sentiment, staff names, locations, service keywords, and other prescribed wording.
Incentives and staff targets
Customer rewards and employee review quotas can distort who is asked, how they are approached, and what gets posted.
Pressure at the point of service
A QR code is useful; watching a customer post before returning keys, closing a bill, or providing a remedy is not a free choice.
Authoritative baseline
Read the policy, not folklore.
The checker is deliberately conservative and explains every flag. Google makes the enforcement decision, and policies can change.
Google Maps prohibited and restricted contentFake engagement, rating manipulation, incentives, pressure, and specific-content requests.Google’s tips for getting more reviewsGenuine requests, direct links, balanced feedback, and privacy-conscious replies.RevuKit’s plain-English policy guidePractical examples for incentives, gating, employees, QR codes, and automation.
Build the safer workflow
Fix the request, then make the honest route easy.
Generate the direct review link
Find the correct profile, copy neutral wording, and check SMS segments.
Open link tool Create a direct QR codeTurn the verified destination into a printable counter sign or leave-behind.
Open QR tool Understand review gatingSee how private surveys and conditional routing can distort the public review set.
Read the guideQuestions, answered
Google review request policy FAQ
Can businesses ask customers for Google reviews?+
Yes. Google allows businesses to encourage genuine reviews. The request should not include an incentive, influence the rating or wording, selectively target likely positive reviewers, or pressure customers to post while staff watch.
What does the Google review policy checker inspect?+
It checks the customer-facing wording and the surrounding workflow. The analysis looks for rating pressure, satisfaction gating, incentives, requests for specific content, on-premises pressure, conflicted reviewers, staff quotas, and unclear eligibility rules.
Does a neutral message guarantee the process follows Google policy?+
No. A message can sound neutral while the business sends it only to high survey scorers, rewards staff per five-star review, or offers customers a benefit elsewhere. That is why this checker asks about both the visible copy and the actual workflow.
Does RevuKit upload or store the request I paste?+
No. The rule checks run locally in your browser. The tool does not send the request text to RevuKit, Google, or an AI service.
Is it against Google policy to offer a discount for an honest review?+
Yes. Google prohibits incentives such as discounts, payments, free goods or services, and other benefits for posting, changing, or removing a review, even when the business says the review may be honest or any rating.
Can I ask customers to mention an employee or service?+
Google says merchants should not request specific review content and explicitly includes requests identifying a staff member. Ask customers to describe their experience in their own words instead.
Is this checker legal advice?+
No. It is a plain-language screening tool based on published Google policy signals. Businesses should also consider applicable consumer-protection, privacy, professional-conduct, and messaging laws in their jurisdiction.