How a reconsideration request works
A reconsideration request is only available when Google has applied a manual action, which means a reviewer looked at your site, decided part of it breaches the spam policies, and recorded that decision. It shows in the Manual Actions report in Search Console, states which policy was breached and whether it covers the whole site or particular URLs, and it comes with a button to request a review.
The request itself is a written explanation submitted through that report. Another person reads it, checks the site, and either lifts the action or leaves it in place. There is no scoring, no automatic approval and no way to jump the queue. If the report says nothing is applied to your site, there is nothing to request: a drop with no message is an algorithmic demotion, and no appeal exists for one of those.
Why a reconsideration request matters
It is the only route back from a manual action, and it is judged by a person, so how you present the work is part of the outcome. The reviewer is deciding whether the problem has genuinely been dealt with or merely hidden, and a request that shows the evidence answers that question for them without a second round.
It matters, too, because failure is expensive. A rejected request means the action stays, the site keeps losing traffic, and the next attempt starts from a weaker position. The right order is always the same: understand exactly what was flagged, fix all of it, document what you did, and only then write.
Common mistakes with reconsideration requests
Sending it too early is the classic. Partial clean-ups get rejected, and so do requests that fix the examples Google named while leaving the same problem sitting elsewhere on the site.
Arguing is the second. A request that disputes the decision, blames a previous agency without showing what changed, or asks for leniency gives the reviewer nothing to check — and so does a one-line message. The third mistake is leaving out the awkward part. If links were bought, say so, list what was removed, and show the disavow file covering what could not be removed.
Getting it right
Write it as a short report rather than a plea. Say what the problem was in plain terms, what caused it, what you changed, and what you have put in place so it does not happen again. Include evidence the reviewer can open: the list of URLs cleaned or removed, records of the removal requests you sent, the date the disavow file was uploaded, the pages that were rewritten.
Then wait properly. Reviews take days and sometimes longer, and sending a second request while the first is open helps nobody. If the action is lifted, rankings may not return to where they were, because the work that earned those rankings may be the same work that caused the action. Cleaning up and then rebuilding is the real substance of penalty recovery.