The A+ page took three weeks to design and the rejection took one sentence. Almost every one of those sentences maps to a rule Amazon published, and almost every fix is a rewrite of the one module the sentence names.
A+ Content review is stricter than listing review and less forgiving than ad review, because Amazon treats it as brand-authored marketing on its own page. The rules are public. The frustration is that the notice is short, the module it flags is often not the one you would have guessed, and each round trip costs up to a week. So this guide is a lookup table: the notice, the trigger, the rewrite.
Evolve Media Agency designs A+ Content, so we submit a lot of it and see a lot of rejections. The notice wordings below are paraphrased from Amazon's guidelines and from actual notices sellers have posted; Amazon rewords them from time to time, so match on meaning rather than exact text. The rules are Amazon's; the rewrites are ours.
For what A+ is and how to build it, the A+ Content guide is the reference. This post starts at the moment the submission comes back.
How A+ Review Works
Three things about the process explain most of the confusion.
- Review is automated first, then human. A keyword scan runs on submission and can bounce content before a person sees it. Human review follows and can take up to about seven business days. A rejection can come from either stage, and the automated stage is where prohibited-word rejections come from.
- Three surfaces are scanned. The module text fields, the image alt text (the field Amazon calls image keywords), and text rendered inside the images themselves. A claim you removed from the text and left in the graphic is still a violation. Alt text that says "best moisturizer" is a violation.
- Rejections are per module. The notice names the module and the reason. The rest of the layout is preserved; you edit the flagged module and resubmit. Fixing only what was flagged, when three other modules have the same problem, is how a submission gets rejected three times for three reasons.
A+ Content guidelines. Amazon's published rules for what A+ modules may contain, covering prohibited content (pricing, promotions, guarantees, contact details, unverifiable claims, competitor references, customer quotes), formatting (grammar, capitalization, font abuse, language), image requirements (resolution, uniqueness, readable text, accurate alt text) and category restrictions. The seller-facing page lives in Seller Central; the KDP version of the same guidelines is public and substantively identical on content restrictions.
The process implication: read every module against every rule before the first submission, because the reviewer will. Section 12 is the scan we run.
"Remove Pricing Or Promotional Language"
The most common rejection, and the widest net. A+ cannot mention price, discounts, promotions, shipping, time-sensitive offers, or anything that ranks the product against the market.
| Triggers | Before (Rejected) | After (Passes) |
|---|---|---|
| Price and discounts | "Save 20% when you buy the 3-pack" | "Available as a single tin or a 3-pack" |
| Shipping | "Free shipping on every order" | Delete. Shipping is not A+ content. |
| Rank and superlatives | "#1 best-selling tallow balm" | "Tallow balm made from grass-fed beef tallow and olive oil" |
| Time-sensitive language | "Limited time," "new for 2026," "holiday edition" | "Now available in a 4-ounce size" |
| Calls to buy | "Add to cart now," "buy today" | Delete. The buy box is above. |
| "Free" in any form | "Free gift inside," "free of charge" | "Includes a travel tin" (if it is in the box) |
Note that "fragrance-free" and "free of parabens" are ingredient statements and generally pass; "free" as a price or promotion does not. The automated scan does not always know the difference, so if a fragrance-free product keeps bouncing, try "unscented" and "no added fragrance" in the flagged module and keep "fragrance-free" in the bullets.
"Remove Guarantee Or Warranty Information"
Guarantee information is strictly prohibited in A+, including satisfaction guarantees, money-back language, warranty terms, and references to off-Amazon return or refund policies. This one surprises brands because a lifetime warranty is a real product attribute and it is on the packaging.
| Before (Rejected) | After (Passes) | Why |
|---|---|---|
| "100% satisfaction guaranteed or your money back" | Delete the module or replace with a product-fact module | Guarantees are prohibited outright |
| "Backed by our lifetime warranty" | Delete from A+; keep it in the product description field and on the packaging | Warranty terms are guarantee information |
| "Not happy? Return it within 60 days" | Delete | Return policy references, on or off Amazon, are prohibited |
| "Built to last" | "Stainless steel body, riveted handle" | Durability as a promise reads as a guarantee; durability as a material fact passes |
The pattern that runs through the whole guide starts here: replace the promise with the fact that would justify it. A reviewer cannot verify "built to last." They can see "stainless steel."
"Remove Unsubstantiated Claims"
Any statement of fact that Amazon cannot verify from the listing, the packaging or a recognized certification. This is the rejection that hits supplements, skincare, baby, cleaning and anything with a health, safety or environmental angle, and it is the one where the automated scan and the human reviewer both bite.
| Claim Type | Before (Rejected) | After (Passes) |
|---|---|---|
| Health outcome | "Reduces inflammation and heals eczema" | "Made with tallow, which is rich in vitamins A, D, E and K" (a composition fact) |
| Clinical language | "Clinically proven," "dermatologist recommended" | Delete unless you hold the study or endorsement and it is on the listing; then state it exactly as certified |
| Safety | "100% safe," "non-toxic," "chemical-free" | "Five ingredients: tallow, olive oil, beeswax, shea butter, vitamin E" (the ingredient list is the safety statement) |
| Environmental | "Eco-friendly," "sustainable," "biodegradable," "green" | Name the certification exactly ("Certified compostable to ASTM D6400") or drop it. Uncertified environmental terms are a standing rejection trigger. |
| Performance numbers | "Saves 40% on energy," "lasts 3x longer" | "Rated at 9 watts" / "500-hour rated bulb life" (the spec, sourced) |
| Antibacterial and drug terms | "Antibacterial," "antimicrobial," "kills 99.9% of germs" | Delete unless the product is EPA-registered for that claim and the registration is on the listing |
| Regulatory | "FDA approved" | Delete. Supplements and cosmetics are not FDA approved; "made in an FDA-registered facility" is a different, verifiable statement |
The rewrite rule is the same every time: describe what the product is and contains; do not describe what it does to the customer. Categories with the most claims to police, supplements above all, are covered in the supplements playbook, and the objection-flip technique from the A+ teardowns (naming the fear and denying it) passes review more easily than the positive claim because a denial is easier to verify.
"Remove External Links Or Contact Information"
A+ cannot point anywhere but the Amazon page it is on. That means no URLs (even unlinked, even your own), no QR codes, no email addresses, phone numbers or physical addresses, no social handles, and no language that sends the customer elsewhere ("visit our website for the full range," "contact us with questions").
The image case is the one that gets missed. A lot of packaging carries a website and a QR code, and a clean product shot reproduces them legibly. Amazon's reviewer zooms. Retouch the label in the A+ images or shoot the angle that hides it; the main listing images have their own rules and the same packaging often passes there, which is why sellers assume it passes in A+.
"Remove Quotes, Reviews Or Awards"
Customer reviews, star ratings, testimonials and quotes attributed to private individuals are prohibited in A+. Quotes from well-known publications or public figures are allowed in limited number (two is the commonly cited maximum) with attribution, and award information must carry a disclaimer naming the source and date.
| Before (Rejected) | After (Passes) |
|---|---|
| "'Best balm I've ever used' - Sarah K., verified buyer" | Delete. Private-individual quotes are prohibited regardless of how real they are. |
| Five gold stars as a graphic element | Delete. Star graphics imply ratings. |
| "Rated 4.8 out of 5 by 2,000+ customers" | Delete. Ratings live in the review section. |
| "Winner: Best Natural Skincare 2025" | "Named Best Natural Skincare in [Publication]'s 2025 awards (source: [Publication], [date])." One award, sourced, dated. |
| "As seen in Vogue, Forbes, GQ" logo strip | One or two publication quotes, attributed, with the actual quote; drop the logo strip (third-party trademarks, section 7) |
Brands push on this one because social proof converts. The place for it on Amazon is the review section, Vine, and the Brand Story module's more limited text, none of which are A+ modules. The A+ equivalent of social proof is specificity: the ingredient list, the material, the spec, the process. Section 12 of the A+ teardowns on this site covers why that works.
"Remove Competitor References Or Trademark Symbols"
Two related rejections. The first: any brand name other than your own, in text or in an image, including on a prop, a comparison, or a "works with" statement. The second: trademark and copyright symbols (TM, R-in-a-circle, C-in-a-circle) anywhere in the content, including on your own logo.
- Comparison charts compare only your own ASINs. "Unlike [competitor]" or a side-by-side with a named brand is rejected. An unbranded "typical balm" column is a gray area that sometimes passes and sometimes does not; the safe version compares your own products.
- Compatibility statements ("fits iPhone," "works with Alexa") are competitor references in A+ even when they are accurate and allowed in the title. Move them to the bullets and description, where compatibility language is permitted, and describe the fit generically in A+ ("fits phones up to 6.7 inches").
- Props and backgrounds: a branded appliance, a logo on a t-shirt, a recognizable bottle in the frame. Retouch or reshoot.
- Your own trademark symbol: strip the R-in-a-circle or TM from the logo file used in A+. Your registration is unaffected; the symbol is what Amazon rejects.
Brand Registry is what makes your own brand name allowed; the Brand Registry and trademark playbook covers the registration side, and section 11 covers the eligibility errors that come from a registration mismatch.
"Prohibited Keyword" And Category-Restricted Terms
The automated scan checks text fields, alt text and image text against a list of words that are prohibited outright or prohibited in context. The list is not published in full. The categories that come up most, from Amazon's guidelines and from rejections we have seen:
CBD and its variants, prescription drug names, certain botanicals with restricted status, "antibiotic," "antibacterial," "antimicrobial." If the product legitimately contains a flagged ingredient, the listing itself usually needs category approval first.
"Guaranteed," "free shipping," "#1," "best seller," "top rated," "cheapest," "sale." Covered in section 2; they are also on the word list, so they bounce before a human reads them.
"Eco-friendly," "environmentally friendly," "green," "sustainable," "biodegradable," "compostable" without a named certification. The certification name itself ("BPI Certified Compostable") is what passes.
Holidays and events with religious associations, any third-party brand name, and Amazon's own marks and programs ("Amazon's Choice," "Prime," "Best Seller badge"). Amazon does not let you cite Amazon.
When a submission bounces instantly with a keyword rejection and you cannot find the word, check the alt text and the image text. Alt text written for SEO ("best natural moisturizer for dry skin") is a keyword violation and an alt-text violation at once, because alt text must describe the image for a screen reader rather than sell it. "Open tin of balm on a wooden table" is what passes.
Image Rejections: Resolution, Text, Reuse, Dimensions
Image rejections come with less explanation than text rejections and are the ones most likely to need a designer rather than a copy edit.
| Notice (Paraphrased) | What Triggered It | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| "Image quality does not meet requirements" | Upscaled, compressed or blurry; text that pixelates at zoom | Export at the module's exact pixel dimensions from a clean source; no upscaling |
| "Image dimensions do not match the module" | A 970x300 image in a 970x600 slot, or a 1464-wide Premium asset in a Standard module | One export per module at the size the module specifies; do not let the uploader crop |
| "Text in image is not readable" | Small type, low contrast, text over a busy photo; judged at mobile width | Minimum legible size at 360px wide; high contrast; or move the copy to the text field |
| "Content is duplicated / not unique" | The same image already in the listing's image gallery, or the same text in the bullets | A+ images must be unique to A+; reuse the shoot and export a different frame. Rewrite copy rather than pasting bullets. |
| "Text in image duplicates text field" / accessibility | Key product information rendered only inside the image (ingredients, instructions, specs) | Put the information in the module's text field; use the image for evidence rather than copy. Screen readers and marketplace translation cannot read image text. |
| "Image contains prohibited content" | URL or QR on packaging, competitor logo on a prop, trademark symbol, star graphic, price tag | Retouch or reshoot; sections 5-7 |
| "Image alt text is missing or does not describe the image" | Empty alt text, keyword-stuffed alt text, or alt text over the character limit | A plain sentence describing what is in the picture, under the limit, no claims |
The accessibility rejection ("text in image") is the one that has grown in 2026. Amazon increasingly rejects modules where critical information exists only as pixels, and the fix is structural: the image shows the product, the text field carries the facts. Designers who came from infographic-heavy listing images find this backwards; the infographic images guide is for the gallery, and A+ is a different medium with a text field beside every image. The graphic design service page has the module dimension list we build to.
Grammar, Formatting And Language Mismatch
Amazon rejects A+ for writing quality, which no other marketplace review does at this level. From the guidelines: grammatical errors, punctuation errors, misspellings, strings of all-caps text, abuse of bold and italics, and unnecessary or repeated information can all result in rejection. Bold and italics are for headings or a few words.
- All caps: a headline in caps is usually tolerated; a sentence or a bullet list in caps is rejected. Use sentence case in text fields and save caps for a short headline.
- Bold abuse: bolding every other phrase reads as font abuse. One bold phrase per paragraph at most.
- Repetition: the same benefit stated in three modules is "repeated information." Each module gets one job (the teardowns on this site cover how to assign them).
- Special characters and emoji: check marks, arrows and emoji in text fields are rejection triggers; use words.
- Language mismatch: content must be in the marketplace language declared for the submission, including any HTML-like tags and any text in images. Spanish text in a US English submission, or English A+ submitted to Amazon.ca's French locale, is rejected.
- Typos: a human reviewer reads the text. One misspelling in a headline is enough.
This is the rejection where a proofreader is cheaper than a week. Run every text field through a spelling and grammar check, then read it aloud; the reviewer will.
The Ecom Profit Box
Our library of ecommerce growth guides, including the listing and A+ frameworks behind this post.
Get It FreeGet A Rejected Page Through Review
Send us the rejection notice and the draft. We will find every module that will bounce, including the ones the notice did not name, and rewrite them so the next submission is the last.
Book A Call"ASIN Not Part Of Your Brand" And Eligibility Errors
Some rejections happen before content review, at the ASIN-application step, and they are data problems rather than content problems.
The brand-name mismatch is the most common and the most annoying, because a listing that has sold for years can carry "Bear Basics Co" while the registration says "Bear Basics." The two strings must match exactly, punctuation included. The fix is on the listing, and if the listing will not accept the edit because another contributor's data is winning, Brand Registry support can force it. The Premium vs Standard framework covers the Premium eligibility criteria, which shift and are best read from the console the day you apply.
The Pre-Submission Scan
Every A+ page we submit goes through this before it leaves the building. It takes twenty minutes and it is the difference between one round and three.
When a rejection comes back anyway, fix the flagged module, then re-run the whole scan on every other module before resubmitting, because the reviewer stops at the first violation and there is usually a second. And if a notice makes no sense, open a case with A+ support quoting the submission ID and the module name; the reply is usually specific and sometimes reveals a rule that is not on the public list.
The counterweight: none of this makes A+ good. It makes it publishable. A page that passes review with six modules of ingredient facts and no argument is compliant and forgettable. The A+ guide and the teardowns on this site cover the argument; this post is only the part that keeps it live.
What To Remember
- Amazon scans three surfaces: the module text fields, the image alt text, and any text rendered inside the images. A claim removed from one and left in another is still rejected.
- Rejections name one module and one reason, and the reviewer stops at the first violation, so fix every module before resubmitting or you will spend three weeks on three rounds.
- Pricing, promotions, shipping, time-sensitive language, superlatives and guarantees are prohibited outright; delete them rather than softening them.
- The universal rewrite is fact for promise: state what the product is, contains and is made of instead of what it does to the customer; "stainless steel" passes where "built to last" does not.
- Nothing in A+ may point off the page: no URLs, QR codes, handles or contact details in text or visible on packaging in the images.
- Customer quotes, star graphics and ratings are prohibited; up to two attributed public quotes and a sourced, dated award are the only social proof allowed.
- Image rejections are structural: exact module dimensions, images unique to A+, text legible at mobile width, key facts in the text field rather than pixels, and plain descriptive alt text.
Where This Came From
- Amazon Seller Central, A+ Content guidelines and the A+ Content Manager help pages (login required; cited by name). The publicly readable KDP A+ Content Guidelines carry the same content restrictions (guarantees, contact details, shipping, quotes, formatting, uniqueness, alt text, language) and are linked as the accessible copy.
- Amazon Seller Forums, a posted A+ rejection notice showing the external-links wording and module-level format of actual notices.
- Nova Data, A+ Content 2026 guide, for the observation that image-spec and text-on-image (accessibility) rejections have grown in 2026. A seller-tools vendor.
- Evolve Media Agency A+ submissions and client rejection notices, 2023-2026. First-party; the frequency ordering and the before/after rewrites are ours. Rewrite examples use Bear Basics Co., our own brand, so no third party's copy is quoted.
- Inference note: Amazon does not publish its complete prohibited-word list or its review-time targets. The "about seven days" and the term groups in section 8 are from Amazon's stated guidance plus observed rejections rather than a published specification.