Should I enable automated extensions?

What “automated extensions” means in Google Ads today (and why the wording matters)

If you’ve been running Google Ads for a while, “automated extensions” was the common phrase for Google-created add-ons like dynamic sitelinks or dynamic callouts. In today’s Google Ads UI and documentation, these are generally referred to as assets, and the automation falls into two main buckets that behave differently.

Account-level automated assets (the classic “automated extensions”)

These are automated assets that can be created and served at the account level and shared across eligible campaigns. The most common examples are dynamic sitelinks, dynamic callouts, and dynamic structured snippets. The key idea is simple: if the system predicts an automated asset will improve performance, it can generate and show it with your ad. These automated assets can show alongside or instead of your manually created assets, depending on what’s predicted to work best for that auction.

Cost-wise, you’re generally charged the same way you always are for ad interactions (for example, clicks), and Google Ads limits charges to no more than two clicks per impression across an ad and its assets. One notable exception is that clicks on seller ratings themselves aren’t charged (clicks on the ad still are).

Text customization (formerly “automatically created assets”) at the campaign level

Separate from account-level automated assets, there’s another automation layer that generates additional headlines and descriptions for responsive search ads. This capability was formerly known as “automatically created assets,” and it has been transitioning into text customization as part of AI Max for Search campaigns settings (with upgrades beginning May 27, 2025).

Two practical details matter here: first, these system-generated headlines/descriptions don’t count against the responsive search ad limits (15 headlines and 4 descriptions). Second, generation quality depends heavily on your landing pages—if your pages are thin, unclear, or frequently changing, you should expect weaker or fewer usable assets.

Should you enable them? In most accounts, yes—if you do it with guardrails

After managing accounts for 15+ years, my default position is: enable automated extensions/automated assets when you have solid fundamentals in place, then manage them actively. When advertisers get into trouble with automation, it’s rarely because automation exists—it’s because they turned it on in an account that wasn’t ready, then didn’t review what the system created.

The upside: more relevance, more coverage, and less manual busywork

Automated assets exist for one reason: to help your ads take up more useful real estate and connect people to what they actually want. Dynamic sitelinks can route users to deeper pages that match intent. Dynamic callouts and structured snippets can surface credibility points and product/service breadth without you writing 50 variations. And if you’re aiming for stronger responsive search ad performance, text customization can add incremental message testing without consuming your manual asset slots.

Another advantage that experienced advertisers appreciate: automated assets can react faster than most teams can. If your site content changes often (inventory, seasonal categories, shipping messages, location details), automated assets can sometimes keep ads aligned with reality—provided your landing pages are accurate and well-structured.

The downside: less message control (and a higher standard for landing pages)

The main drawback is straightforward: the system may choose messaging or destinations you wouldn’t have chosen. That can be harmless (“About Us” sitelink shows sometimes) or painful (an outdated promo, a weak category page, or a callout that creates compliance issues).

Also, automation can expose messy site architecture. If your navigation, headings, or page templates are inconsistent, Google can still generate assets—but they may be vague, redundant, or off-brand. In regulated categories, or whenever legal disclaimers must appear with specific claims, automation needs especially careful review.

Finally, understand the “instead of” behavior: if you’ve invested in strong manual assets, you don’t want automated assets replacing them with weaker options. The solution isn’t automatically “turn it all off”—it’s to build a better manual asset set, then remove or opt out of only the automated pieces that don’t meet your standard.

When enabling automated extensions is the right move (and when I’d be cautious)

I usually recommend enabling automation when…

You’re running lead gen or ecommerce with clear site structure, you have multiple strong landing pages per theme, and you already maintain a healthy set of manual assets (sitelinks, callouts, structured snippets, images where appropriate). In this scenario, automated assets typically act as incremental performance helpers—filling gaps, finding additional pathways, and improving ad usefulness for long-tail queries.

I’m also more comfortable enabling these features when you have stable conversion tracking and clean measurement, because you can evaluate impact without guessing.

I’m cautious (or selectively opt out) when…

If your business has strict compliance requirements, highly controlled brand language, frequent short-lived promotions, or a website where important messaging sits behind scripts, PDFs, or gated content, automation is more likely to misfire. I’m also cautious when a single Google Ads account spans multiple brands/locations/service lines with very different rules—automation can accidentally generalize what should stay segmented.

In these cases, you can still use automation, but you’ll want tighter governance: remove individual automated assets you don’t like, and consider opting out of specific automated asset types that create risk (rather than disabling everything across the board).

How to enable automated assets safely (my practical framework)

Step 1: Build strong manual assets first so automation complements (not replaces) quality

Before you lean on automated assets, give the system a high-quality “menu” to choose from. For sitelinks, that usually means having multiple, genuinely distinct destinations (pricing, services, locations, testimonials, booking, contact, etc.) and keeping them fresh. For callouts and structured snippets, it means coverage across your real differentiators (not filler like “Great service”).

This matters because when manual assets are thin or repetitive, automation tends to get blamed for poor output—when the real issue is that the account didn’t provide enough strong options in the first place.

Step 2: Review what Google created (and remove what you don’t want)

The system gives you visibility and control, but you have to use it. Automated assets and text customization can be reviewed through asset reporting, where you can filter by assets that were automatically created. If you see a dynamic sitelink, callout, or structured snippet you don’t like, you can typically pause it (to stop serving while keeping the option to re-enable) or remove it (to prevent it from serving again).

For account-level automated assets specifically, you can also turn off particular automated asset types from the account-level automated assets settings area. This “surgical” approach is usually the best balance: keep the automation that helps, disable the pieces that create risk.

Step 3: Treat it like an optimization test, not a belief system

Don’t decide based on ideology (“automation is good” or “automation is bad”). Decide based on results. Compare performance over a meaningful window (enough conversion volume to reduce noise), and watch not only conversion rate and CPA/ROAS, but also lead quality signals if you have them (qualified leads, booked calls that show, downstream revenue).

Also remember that the system can generate assets, then later stop serving them if they perform poorly or if the context changes (site edits, keyword shifts, ad edits). That’s helpful—but it’s not a substitute for a human keeping standards high.

Quick decision checklist: enable automated extensions if you can say “yes” to most of these

• My landing pages are strong and specific (clear headings, clear offers, clean navigation, no outdated promos).
• I already use manual assets that reflect what I actually want shown (not the bare minimum).
• I can review asset reporting regularly and remove/pause anything inaccurate, off-brand, or risky.
• My conversion tracking is trustworthy so I can evaluate impact without guesswork.
• I’m comfortable with “predicted to improve performance” logic and understand automated assets may show alongside or instead of manual assets.

The expert recommendation (most advertisers): enable, monitor, and prune

In the majority of real-world accounts, enabling automated extensions (account-level automated assets) is worth it—as long as you commit to reviewing what’s created and removing what doesn’t meet your standards. If you want the benefits without the surprises, the winning approach is almost always the same: build excellent manual assets first, then let automation add incremental lift, and actively curate anything the system generates that you wouldn’t proudly claim as your own.

Whether you should enable automated extensions (Google’s account-level automated assets like dynamic sitelinks and callouts) comes down to readiness: they’re often worth turning on when you already have strong manual assets in place, clear and up-to-date landing pages, and reliable conversion tracking, because automation can add coverage and keep ads relevant as your site evolves, but they require ongoing review to avoid off-brand messaging, outdated promo links, or compliance issues—especially in regulated or multi-brand accounts. If you want a simple way to “enable, monitor, and prune” without treating automation as set-and-forget, Blobr connects to your Google Ads and runs specialized AI agents that continuously audit assets and landing-page alignment, highlight what’s likely helping or hurting, and surface concrete recommendations you can apply while keeping your own rules and constraints in control.