Name: maj-labs/app-store-review
Rating: 97.8 (1 reviews)
Author: maj-labs

maj-labs/app-store-review

Full-lifecycle Apple App Store review for iOS and iPadOS apps. Use for pre-submission audits, rejection diagnosis and Resolution Center replies, Guideline 4.3 spam or similarity recovery, human-craft and low-effort audits, Apple design and Human Interface Guidelines audits of native interaction, motion, gestures, materials, haptics, accessibility, and iPad adaptation, App Review Notes, privacy manifests, Info.plist permission strings, subscriptions, Sign in with Apple, account deletion, UGC, third-party AI consent, TestFlight or App Store readiness, and vague requests such as "review my app" or "will Apple approve this" when an Xcode, Expo, React Native, or Flutter project is present. Produces evidence-tagged Markdown, JSON, and a self-contained visual HTML report, runs a read-only deterministic scan first, and only offers grouped fixes after the report.

2.10x

Quality

97%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

99%

2.10x

Average score across 5 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Quality

Content

92%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is a lean, operational contract with executable commands, explicit validation checkpoints, and clean one-level-deep reference structure. Its only weakness is mild verbosity in the rules and repeated contract boilerplate.

Suggestions

Consolidate the eleven non-negotiable rules into a shorter grouped list or fold the security/untrusted-content rules into a single compact block to reduce repetition.

The Mode A/B/C contract text appears both in prose and as fenced blocks; reference a single canonical block per mode to avoid duplicating boilerplate.

Trim the optional-input scanner examples to the one or two most common invocations, moving the rest into references/frameworks.md or a dedicated CLI reference.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is dense and operational with no padding of concepts Claude already knows, but the eleven non-negotiable rules and repeated mode-specific contract boilerplate could be tightened slightly. It is efficient with only minor instances that could be trimmed.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides copy-paste ready commands ('python3 scripts/app_store_review_scan.py <project-path> --format all --output-dir <report-directory>', 'python3 scripts/render_app_store_report.py <final-report.json> --output <report.html>') and exact required text blocks (Mode A header, six-line Mode C contract, handoff block) covering the common cases.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Clear sequence (Discover → Establish scope → Mode A → visual report) with explicit validation checkpoints: read-only first pass, 'wait for approval before editing', output gates verified literally, and visual inspection 'at a desktop width near 1440 px and a mobile width near 390 px'.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-signaled one-level-deep references to nine reference files and two scripts, all of which exist in the bundle, with a dedicated 'Packaged resources' link list and inline 'Read ... completely' cues for easy navigation.	5 / 5
	Total	19 / 20 Passed

Description

100%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is comprehensive, specific, and well-triggered, clearly answering both what the skill does and when to invoke it using third-person voice. It is dense but every clause carries a distinct capability or trigger.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete actions across the full lifecycle — 'pre-submission audits, rejection diagnosis and Resolution Center replies', 'Guideline 4.3 spam or similarity recovery', 'human-craft and low-effort audits', and 'Produces evidence-tagged Markdown, JSON, and a self-contained visual HTML report, runs a read-only deterministic scan first' — giving comprehensive coverage.	5 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what ('Full-lifecycle Apple App Store review ... Produces evidence-tagged Markdown, JSON, and a self-contained visual HTML report') and when ('Use for pre-submission audits ... and vague requests such as "review my app"') with concrete trigger phrases.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Comprehensive natural-term coverage including synonyms and vague user phrasings such as "review my app", "will Apple approve this", plus domain triggers like 'Guideline 4.3', 'Resolution Center', 'Sign in with Apple', and 'Xcode, Expo, React Native, or Flutter'.	5 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear Apple App Store review niche with distinct triggers (App Review, Resolution Center, Guideline 4.3, TestFlight) and minimal overlap risk with general skills.	5 / 5
	Total	20 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Reviewed

~2 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation