To tell whether your tree is correct, you need to find some way to connect the tree to facts of language, and then to actually look at those relevant facts. So far, it seems, you don't have a clue about how to do that. I can help, by telling you a way to do that. It's not a way you will perhaps agree with, or that any other linguist in this wide world agrees with, but it may give you a starting point in figuring out how to do grammatical analysis.
By facts of language, I mean the actual occurrence of an expression in speech or writing, or a judgement from a native speaker about whether an expression is acceptable in his language, or about what it means.
So here is what you do. It's some trouble, but conceptually it is very straightforward. I'll be more specific below, but in outline, you (1) find a context free phrase structure grammar (PSG) that generates your tree, (2) determine what other trees this PSG generates, (3) find out whether the expressions these other trees describe are acceptable.
It there are no other expressions to evaluate, your theory is trivial, and it doesn't really matter whether it's correct. If the other expressions are acceptable in English, you've got a correct tree. If the other expressions are unacceptable, your tree is wrong.
Specifically, to generate a tree, a PSG has a rule for each mother node in the tree that has certain daughter nodes, where the rule permits that mother to have those daughters. That's it. There are few simpler theories. (There have to be a finite number of different rules, different mothers, and different daughters.)