CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

app-store-review

Use when reviewing iOS or iPadOS apps for App Store submission, TestFlight readiness, rejection recovery, Resolution Center replies, Guideline 4.3 similarity, or product craft. Includes iOS 27 compatibility, SDK and deployment gates, scene lifecycle, iPhone Duo, Apple Intelligence, Foundation Models, Siri/App Intents, privacy, subscriptions, accessibility, new App Store assets, and Apple design and Human Interface Guidelines audits of native interaction, motion, gestures, materials, haptics, and iPad adaptation. Applies to Xcode, Expo, React Native, and Flutter projects, supplied rejections or metadata, and requests such as "review my app" or "will Apple approve this".

Quality

85%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%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.

This is a deliberately minimal compatibility loader: perfectly lean and unambiguous as a redirect, but hollow as a skill body. Its entire value depends on an external root SKILL.md that is not present in the evaluated bundle, so actionability and progressive disclosure suffer — the body gives no review guidance and no locally verifiable structure.

Suggestions

Make the loader resilient: add a validation checkpoint instructing Claude to confirm `../../SKILL.md` exists before proceeding, and to surface a clear error (or fall back to a minimal inlined default workflow) if the file is missing — the reference is currently dangling in this bundle.

Inline the essential first steps: summarize the root skill's workflow (e.g., its main phases and key entry files) in a short section so the body remains actionable when the external path fails to resolve, instead of delegating 100% of the content.

Flatten the indirection: either bundle the root SKILL.md's key references one level deep from this skill (explicit links to its main reference files) or relocate the loader next to the root skill, so navigation is a single hop rather than a chain of redirects.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is six lines with zero padding: 'Read `../../SKILL.md` completely before acting', a path-resolution rule, and a guardrail ('Do not summarize or substitute these loader instructions'). No concepts Claude already knows are explained; every token earns its place, matching the lean anchor-5 example.

5 / 5

Actionability

The delegation itself is precise and executable — an exact file path, an explicit rule for resolving 'references/', 'scripts/', and 'evals/' paths, and a clear behavioral instruction. But all task-relevant guidance (the actual app-review workflow) is missing from this body and lives entirely in an external file, fitting 'some concrete guidance but incomplete; missing key details'.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear two-step sequence is present — read the root skill completely before acting, then 'Follow the root skill exactly' — with an anti-shortcut checkpoint ('Do not summarize or substitute') that prevents skipping ahead. No validation loop is needed for a read operation, but the real multi-step workflow and its checkpoints are entirely external and unverifiable from this body, keeping it below 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The bundle contains no references/, scripts/, or assets/ files, and the single reference '`../../SKILL.md`' points outside the skill directory and does not resolve within the provided bundle — the skill is a non-self-contained pointer whose content is one more redirect away (this SKILL.md → root SKILL.md → its references). While clearly signaled, the structure leaves nothing to navigate locally, fitting 'minimal structure; references are buried' better than the mid anchors.

2 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

95%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.

A strong, highly triggerable description with explicit what/when structure and comprehensive, natural keywords. Its only weakness is verbosity: the middle sentence enumerates topics densely and includes mildly buzzwordy terms ('product craft') where a tighter action list would score higher on specificity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists many concrete review activities — 'rejection recovery', 'Resolution Center replies', 'Guideline 4.3 similarity', 'audits of native interaction, motion, gestures, materials, haptics' — with near-comprehensive domain coverage. It stays at 4 rather than 5 because the middle sentence ('Includes iOS 27 compatibility, SDK and deployment gates, scene lifecycle, iPhone Duo...') is a padded topic inventory with buzzwordy terms like 'product craft' rather than crisp concrete actions.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both questions: the 'what' is reviewing iOS/iPadOS apps for submission, rejection recovery, and HIG/design audits, and the 'when' opens with 'Use when reviewing iOS or iPadOS apps for...' and closes with concrete trigger requests '"review my app"' or '"will Apple approve this"'. This matches the anchor-5 example structure exactly.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural-term coverage: 'App Store submission', 'TestFlight readiness', 'rejection', 'Resolution Center', 'Guideline 4.3', 'Xcode', 'Expo', 'React Native', 'Flutter', plus literal example user phrasings '"review my app"' and '"will Apple approve this"'. These are exactly the words a user needing this skill would say.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear niche — Apple App Store review with Apple-specific terminology (Resolution Center, Guideline 4.3, TestFlight, HIG) — that virtually no other skill would claim. The only slight overlap is with generic code-review skills via 'review my app', but the Apple framing keeps conflict risk minimal.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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.

Repository

ElxMaj/app-store-review-skill

Path

skills/app-store-review/SKILL.md

Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.