How can you check who submitted which URL in the Search Console?

What does "correctly submitted" really mean?

Mueller remains deliberately vague on this point. It is assumed to refer to technically valid submissions through the Search Console, as opposed to failed or misformatted requests.

In practice, this concerns URLs submitted via the URL inspection tool or declared XML sitemaps. The phrasing leaves room for interpretation: Google does not specify if a "correct submission" requires the URL to be crawled or indexed, or simply that it was sent without technical error.

Do all owners really have the same level of access?

Yes, that is the principle of Search Console. A "full" owner has the same viewing rights as any other full owner, regardless of who made the submission.

This implies that a newly added owner can view the history of past submissions. No individual isolation exists: if five people have access as owners, each sees the same overall activity data.

Does this feature really resolve any concrete SEO issues?

Partially. The ability to view submitted URLs allows for identifying duplicate submissions, unnecessary indexing requests, or orphan URLs mistakenly pushed live.

The main shortcoming remains the lack of attribution metadata: you can see that a URL has been submitted, but not who did it or why. For a multi-contributor team, this creates a blind spot.

• Shared transparency: all owners see the same submissions
• No individual traceability: it is impossible to identify the author of a submission
• Depends on permission level: only full owners have this access
• Limited history: Google does not indefinitely store this data

Is this statement consistent with observed practices?

Yes, it confirms what is already seen in the field. All owners of a Search Console share the same view of URLs submitted via the inspection tool.

The issue is that Mueller does not specify the retention period of this history. On some properties, it has been observed that submission data disappears after a few months, making retrospective auditing impossible. [To be verified]: the exact retention period varies without clear official documentation.

What nuances should be added to this statement?

The distinction between "viewing" and "identifying the author" is crucial. You can see that a URL has been submitted, but the Search Console will never tell you who clicked the "Request Indexing" button.

For an agency managing multiple client accounts, this poses a real issue of accountability. It is impossible to trace a manipulation error to a specific team member without resorting to third-party tools or external logs.

In what cases does this rule not apply?

Users with restricted permissions ("limited access user" or "associate") do not necessarily see the same data. Google applies a hierarchy of rights, but the public documentation remains vague on the exact nuances.

Additionally, if a submission fails on the server side (500 error, timeout, etc.), it may never appear in the interface. "Correctly submitted" therefore excludes technical failures, without the user always being informed of this failure.

What should be done concretely to monitor submissions?

Establish an external tracking register: a simple shared spreadsheet where each URL submission is manually logged with the date, author, and reason. It’s basic, but it’s the only way to have real traceability.

Alternatively, use the Search Console API to regularly export submission data and cross-reference it with your own activity logs. Automation avoids human forgetfulness, but requires some development.

What mistakes should be avoided when submitting URLs?

Do not overwhelm Google with unnecessary indexing requests. Submitting 500 URLs at once because they do not appear in the index within 48 hours is counterproductive and creates noise.

Also avoid submitting URLs blocked by robots.txt or marked as noindex: the Search Console will accept the request, but Google will do nothing. You are wasting a potentially limited quota (Google has never confirmed a strict limit, but slowdowns are observed beyond a few dozen submissions daily).

How can I check that my team is using this tool correctly?

Organize quarterly submission audits: export the submitted URLs, compare them with your strategic indexing plan, and identify anomalies. An orphan URL mistakenly pushed live can reveal a process issue.

Train your teams on best practices: only submit priority URLs, new or recently updated ones, and never en masse without documented reasoning. Quality takes precedence over quantity.

• Create a shared tracking register for submissions with author and date
• Limit owner access to strictly necessary personnel
• Automate the export of submission data via the Search Console API
• Only submit strategic URLs, not the entire site
• Quarterly audit submissions to spot errors