This paper describes methods and tools used for the post-annotation checking of Prague Dependency Treebank 2.0 data. The annotation process was complicated by many factors: for example, the corpus is divided into several layers that must reflect each other; the annotation rules changed and evolved during the annotation process; some parts of the data were annotated separately and in parallel and had to be merged with the data later. The conversion of the data from the old format to a new one was another source of possible problems besides omnipresent human inadvertence. The checking procedures are classified according to several aspects, e.g. their linguistic relevance and their role in the checking process, and prominent examples are given. In the last part of the paper, the methods are compared and scored.