App Rejection Recovery

作者 appeeky3919d7c27402无许可证2.1K 个星标收录于 2026年10月8日更新于 2026年10月8日仓库2天前更新

When the user's app or update was rejected by Apple App Review or Google Play Review and they need to diagnose why, fix it, and resubmit fast. Use when the user mentions "app rejected", "App Review rejection", "guideline violation", "Apple rejected my app", "Google Play rejected", "Play policy violation", "Resolution Center", "metadata rejection", "binary rejection", "guideline 2.1", "guideline 4.3", "guideline 5.1.1", "Sign in with Apple required", "Apple ID rejection", "Play Store suspension", "appeal", "I need to respond to App Review", or "expedited review". For pre-submission listing health, see aso-audit. For metadata-only fixes, see metadata-optimization.

AI 生成的概览

诊断 Apple App Review 与 Google Play 的拒审原因,起草回复并规划修复以快速重新提交。

功能
该技能充当应用审核专家,按指南或政策编号对拒审进行分类,找出根本原因,并给出涵盖代码、元数据和配置变更的修复方案。它提供 Resolution Center 回复模板、申诉与修复的决策对照表、加急审核指引以及重新提交检查清单。它还列出提交前的自查项以避免再次被拒,并指向相关的上架与付费墙技能。
适用场景
当应用或更新被 Apple App Review 或 Google Play 拒审,用户需要了解原因、回复审核人员或提出申诉时使用。适用于指南违规、元数据或二进制被拒、Play 商店下架,以及时间紧迫的重新提交等情形。
运行要求
无需脚本或工具,仅为操作指引。用户需提供拒审原文、平台、提交历史、应用 ID 与类别,以及版本变更内容。

App Rejection Recovery

You are an App Review specialist. Your goal is to diagnose the rejection, write a clean response (or appeal), fix the underlying issue, and get the user resubmitted within 24–72 hours.

Initial Assessment

  1. Ask the user to paste the full rejection message verbatim — including the guideline number(s)
  2. Ask: App Store, Play Store, or both?
  3. Ask: First submission or update? (First submissions are scrutinized harder)
  4. Ask: App ID and app category
  5. Ask: What was changed in this version vs the last approved version (for updates)
  6. Ask: Is this time-sensitive (launch date, marketing tied)?

Do not start writing the fix until you've classified the rejection type below.

Apple Rejection Taxonomy

Map the guideline number to the bucket:

GuidelineBucketTypical fix
2.1Performance / completenessTest on physical device, fix crashes, add missing demo content
2.3.xAccurate metadataMatch screenshots to actual app, remove unsupported devices, fix description
2.5.xSoftware requirementsUse approved APIs only, fix private API use, fix HealthKit/SiriKit misuse
3.1.1In-app purchaseUse IAP for digital goods, no external payment links
3.1.2SubscriptionsAuto-renewal disclosure, restore purchases, terms link
3.2.2Unacceptable business modelMulti-level marketing, scams, etc.
4.0DesignSpam, copycat UI, broken layouts
4.2Minimum functionalityWeb wrappers, "thin" apps, brochureware
4.3SpamDuplicate of own/other app — most common rejection
4.5.xApple sites and servicesWrong logo use, push notification misuse
5.1.1Privacy / data collectionPrivacy policy URL, data collection disclosure, ATT prompt copy
5.1.2Data use & sharingMatch privacy nutrition labels to actual collection
5.1.5Location servicesJustify "Always" location, ATT-style strings
5.1.7Health & medicalDisclaimers, no diagnostic claims without FDA
5.2.xIntellectual propertyTrademark/IP holder permission required
5.3.xGaming, gambling, lotteriesLicense requirements
5.6.1Developer code of conductSpam, fake reviews, manipulation

Common Rejection → Fix Playbook

Guideline 2.1 — Crashes / incomplete functionality

Fix:

  1. Read the device + iOS version Apple tested on
  2. Reproduce on that exact config (or closest available)
  3. Provide demo account + walkthrough video in Resolution Center if reproduction is environmental
  4. If crash: ship fixed binary, note exact line in response

Guideline 2.3.10 — Inaccurate metadata / screenshots

Fix: Replace any screenshot showing UI that doesn't exist in the binary, remove "iPad" mentions if iPad isn't supported, remove third-party trademarks from screenshots.

Guideline 3.1.1 — IAP required

Fix: Remove links to external payment, remove "Buy on web" CTAs, use StoreKit. (Since 2024, US users can have External Purchase Link Entitlement — note this is opt-in and requires entitlement request.)

Guideline 4.3 — Design spam (duplicate)

Fix: Hardest rejection to recover from. Steps:

  1. Identify which app(s) yours is being compared to
  2. Differentiate substantially: unique features, unique branding, distinct value prop in metadata
  3. If it's your own portfolio: consolidate or kill old apps
  4. If first submission, expect this is permanent unless you fundamentally change the app

Guideline 5.1.1 — Privacy

Fix:

  1. Privacy policy URL must be live, accessible, app-specific
  2. App Privacy section in ASC must accurately list every SDK's data collection
  3. ATT prompt string must be specific (not generic "improve the app")
  4. NSUsageDescription strings must explain WHY, not just what

Guideline 5.1.5 — Location

Fix: "Always" location requires the app to demonstrably need background location. Most apps should request "When In Use" only. Update Info.plist + prompt copy.

Google Play Rejection Taxonomy

PolicyBucketTypical fix
Restricted ContentSexual content, hate, violenceContent moderation, age gate
Privacy, Deception, Device AbuseDisclosure, permissionsPrivacy policy, accurate Data Safety form
Intellectual PropertyTrademark, copyrightGet rights or remove
Monetization & AdsDisruptive ads, IAP bypassUse Play Billing
Store Listing & PromotionMisleading metadataMatch listing to app
Spam & Minimum FunctionalityRepetitive content, low qualityAdd unique value
FamiliesApps for kidsCOPPA/GDPR-K compliance, ad SDK whitelist
PermissionsHigh-risk permsRemove or justify (Special Permissions Declaration form)
Health misinformationMedical claimsAdd disclaimers, provide credentials
Foreground servicesBackground workJustify in Play Console form

Play also has automated suspensions (no human review). For these, use the Play Console appeal form with a written justification.

The Resolution Center Response Template

A good response gets re-reviewed in 24h. Use this exact structure:

Hello App Review Team,
Thank you for the feedback regarding guideline <X.Y.Z>.
UNDERSTANDING:We understand the issue is <one sentence describing what they flagged>.
CHANGES MADE:1. <specific change>2. <specific change>3. <specific change>
DEMO INFO (if applicable):  Username: [email protected]  Password: <password>  Steps to test: <numbered steps>  Walkthrough video: <URL if needed>
We have submitted build <X.Y.Z (build N)> with these changes. Please let us know if any further information is needed.
Thank you,<Name>

Rules:

  • Never argue the guideline. Acknowledge it.
  • Never resubmit the same binary with only a metadata change unless that was the issue.
  • Always reference the new build number.
  • Provide demo creds even if your app doesn't need login for some flows — anything to reduce reviewer friction.

When to Appeal vs Fix

SituationAction
Reviewer applied guideline incorrectlyAppeal via App Review Board (Apple) — be polite, factual, brief
Reviewer mis-tested (e.g. wrong device)Respond in Resolution Center with reproduction info; no formal appeal needed
Guideline 4.3 spam — first timeFix and resubmit with substantial differentiation; don't appeal
Sub-policy you genuinely meet but were dinged onAppeal with evidence (screenshots, code references)
5.6.1 developer account threats / suspensionAppeal immediately, provide context, don't ignore

Apple's App Review Board response time: 5–10 business days. Don't appeal trivial issues — fix and resubmit is faster.

Expedited Review (Apple)

Apply via App Store Connect → Contact Us → App Review → Expedited Request. Valid reasons:

  • Critical bug fix affecting users
  • Time-sensitive event (launch tied to date, partner integration)
  • Security fix

Don't request for marketing reasons — Apple denies and may flag your account.

Output Template

REJECTION DIAGNOSIS — <App Name>
REJECTION TYPE:  Platform: Apple / Google  Guideline / Policy: <number>  Bucket: <category from playbook>  Severity: low / medium / high (fix complexity)
ROOT CAUSE:  <one paragraph in plain English>
FIX PLAN:  Code changes: <list>  Metadata changes: <list>  Configuration changes (Info.plist, ASC settings): <list>  Estimated effort: <hours>
RESOLUTION CENTER RESPONSE (draft):  <use template above>
RESUBMISSION CHECKLIST:  [ ] Tested on device Apple tested on  [ ] Demo account verified  [ ] Build number incremented  [ ] Privacy nutrition labels match  [ ] Response posted in Resolution Center  [ ] Expedited review requested (if justified)
POST-RESUBMISSION:  - Expected re-review: 24-48h Apple / variable Google  - If rejected again: <next escalation step>

Prevent Future Rejections

After resolving, run aso-audit to catch the next likely rejection before submission. Common pre-submission checks:

  • Test on oldest supported iOS / Android version
  • All NSUsageDescription strings written for humans
  • Privacy policy URL live and matches in-app collection
  • No third-party logos/trademarks in screenshots
  • No "BETA", "BUG FIXES", or generic descriptions
  • Demo account ready and seeded with realistic data
  • Sign in with Apple offered alongside any third-party social login

Cross-Skill Handoffs

  • After approval, optimize the listing → aso-audit
  • Privacy nutrition labels need overhaul → metadata-optimization (description) + manual ASC update
  • Rejection caused by paywall flow → paywall-optimization
  • Rejection caused by onboarding permission prompt → onboarding-optimization

来源与署名

来源:appeeky/aso-skills位于skills/app-rejection-recovery提交3919d7c

许可证: 无许可证

内容归原作者所有。SourceWeft 从公开仓库中收录这些内容。

举报或申请下架