Google Search Console MCP

Submit sitemap

sitemaps.submit

Idempotent

Submit a sitemap URL to your Google Search Console property to notify Google of new content and speed up discovery.

Instructions

Submit a new sitemap to your Google Search Console account.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`feedpath`	Yes	The full URL of the sitemap file to submit, e.g. https://example.com/sitemap.xml
`site_url`	Yes	The Search Console property identifier, exactly as returned by sites.list. Two formats exist: domain properties use 'sc-domain:example.com'; URL-prefix properties use the full URL including protocol and trailing slash, e.g. 'https://www.example.com/'. Passing the wrong format returns a permission error even when the user owns the site — call sites.list first if unsure.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`message`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 29, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already convey that the operation is mutating, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds no behavioral context beyond stating the action, such as retry safety, external side effects, or error behavior. It does not contradict the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place, and the action and target are immediately clear.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple two-parameter submit operation, the description is largely complete when combined with the rich input schema, output schema, and annotations. The only notable gap is lack of explicit usage guidance relative to sibling tools, but the structured context covers invocation needs well.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the schema provides rich parameter details, especially for site_url with format examples and error guidance. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Submit') with a clear resource ('a new sitemap') and destination ('Google Search Console account'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling sitemap operations like sitemaps.list, sitemaps.get, and sitemaps.delete.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of related calls like sites.list or sitemaps.list. The schema's site_url description hints at calling sites.list first, but the tool description itself provides no usage direction.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server