rejection-handler

What this skill does

# App Store Rejection Handler

Guide developers through handling App Store rejections — from understanding why the rejection happened, to crafting effective responses, to escalating when appropriate.

## When This Skill Activates

Use this skill when the user:
- Says their app was rejected by App Review
- Asks for help understanding a rejection notice
- Wants to prepare a submission to minimize rejection risk
- Needs help writing a response in Resolution Center
- Wants to appeal a rejection decision
- Asks about common App Store rejection reasons
- Mentions "App Review", "guideline violation", or "rejection"
- Wants a pre-submission audit for guideline compliance

## Reference Files

Before handling a rejection, load:

| File | Purpose |
|------|---------|
| **common-rejections.md** | Top 20 rejection reasons with fixes and response templates |

## Pre-Submission Audit Checklist

Run through this before submitting to avoid the most common rejections. Each item maps to a specific App Store Review Guideline.

### App Completeness (Guideline 2.1)

- [ ] App launches without crashing on all supported devices
- [ ] All features described in metadata are functional
- [ ] No placeholder content (lorem ipsum, test data, TODO screens)
- [ ] No broken links or dead-end navigation
- [ ] All buttons and interactive elements work
- [ ] Demo/test accounts provided in App Review notes if login is required
- [ ] Beta or test labels removed from UI and metadata

### Accurate Metadata (Guideline 2.3)

- [ ] App name matches what the app actually does
- [ ] Screenshots show the actual current app UI
- [ ] Description accurately represents functionality
- [ ] Category selection is appropriate
- [ ] No misleading claims ("best", "#1") without substantiation
- [ ] Age rating reflects actual content
- [ ] What's New text describes actual changes (not marketing copy)
- [ ] Keywords do not include competitor names or misleading terms

### Software Requirements (Guideline 2.5)

- [ ] App uses only public APIs (no private frameworks)
- [ ] No deprecated APIs that are marked for removal
- [ ] App works on the oldest supported iOS/macOS version claimed
- [ ] No remote code execution (no downloading and running code)
- [ ] IPv6 networking compatibility

### In-App Purchase Compliance (Guideline 3.1)

- [ ] All digital content/features use Apple's IAP (not Stripe, PayPal, etc.)
- [ ] Physical goods/services CAN use external payment
- [ ] Subscription terms are clear before purchase
- [ ] "Restore Purchases" button exists and works
- [ ] Subscription management is accessible within the app
- [ ] No language directing users to purchase outside the app
- [ ] Free trial terms are clearly stated

### Design Quality (Guideline 4.0)

- [ ] App uses native UI components (not a web wrapper for existing website)
- [ ] Supports current device screen sizes
- [ ] No empty states without guidance
- [ ] Error messages are user-friendly
- [ ] Loading states exist for async operations
- [ ] App provides meaningful functionality (not a glorified bookmark)

### Privacy Compliance (Guideline 5.1)

- [ ] Privacy policy URL is provided and accessible
- [ ] Privacy policy accurately describes data collection
- [ ] App Tracking Transparency prompt shown before tracking (if applicable)
- [ ] Privacy Nutrition Labels in App Store Connect match actual behavior
- [ ] Data minimization — only collect what you need
- [ ] User data deletion mechanism exists (if data is collected)
- [ ] Privacy manifest included (required for certain APIs, iOS 17+)

### Legal Requirements (Guideline 5.2)

- [ ] App complies with local laws in all territories where distributed
- [ ] Required age gates for restricted content
- [ ] Health/medical disclaimers if applicable
- [ ] Financial disclaimers if applicable

### App Review Notes (Submission)

- [ ] Demo account credentials provided (if login required)
- [ ] Special hardware instructions noted (if needed)
- [ ] Backend requirements explained (if features need server access)
- [ ] Explain non-obvious features or flows
- [ ] Mention any entitlements and why they're needed

## Rejection Handling Process

### Step 1: Read the Rejection Notice Carefully

When a user reports a rejection, gather:

1. **The exact guideline cited** (e.g., "Guideline 4.2 - Design - Minimum Functionality")
2. **The full rejection message text** (Apple provides specific details)
3. **Any screenshots or annotations** Apple included
4. **Whether this is a first submission or re-submission**

Ask via AskUserQuestion:
- "Can you paste the full rejection message from App Store Connect?"
- "Which guideline number was cited?"
- "Is this the first time this app has been submitted?"
- "Have you made changes since a previous rejection?"

### Step 2: Identify the Rejection Category

Read **common-rejections.md** and match the cited guideline to the detailed breakdown. Determine:

- Is the rejection objectively correct? (crash, privacy violation, missing IAP)
- Is the rejection subjective? (minimum functionality, design quality)
- Is the rejection possibly in error? (reviewer misunderstood the app)

### Step 3: Determine Response Strategy

```
Is the rejection objectively correct?
├── YES → Fix the issue and resubmit (Phase A)
└── NO → Did the reviewer misunderstand?
    ├── YES → Clarify with evidence (Phase B)
    └── NO → Is it a subjective judgment call?
        ├── YES → Evaluate: fix or push back? (Phase C)
        └── NO → Appeal (Phase D)
```

### Phase A: Fix and Resubmit

For clear violations (crashes, missing privacy policy, private API usage):

1. Fix the specific issue cited
2. Test thoroughly on the device types Apple may have tested on
3. In the Resolution Center reply, briefly state what was fixed
4. Resubmit the binary

**Response template (Fix and Resubmit):**
```
Thank you for the review.

We've addressed the issue cited in Guideline [X.X]:

- [Specific change made]
- [How it was verified]

The updated build ([version] [build number]) has been submitted
for review.

Please let us know if you have any further questions.
```

### Phase B: Clarify with Evidence

For rejections based on misunderstanding:

1. Do NOT be defensive or argumentative
2. Explain clearly what the app does and why it doesn't violate the guideline
3. Provide screenshots, video, or step-by-step instructions
4. Reference the specific guideline language and explain how you comply

**Response template (Clarification):**
```
Thank you for reviewing our app.

We'd like to provide additional context regarding Guideline [X.X].

[Clear explanation of how the feature/app works]

To demonstrate this:
1. [Step-by-step instructions to see the relevant feature]
2. [Step-by-step instructions continued]

[Optional: screenshot or video link]

We believe this addresses the concern raised. We're happy to
provide any additional information or make a call to discuss
further.
```

### Phase C: Evaluate Subjective Rejections

For "minimum functionality" (4.2), "spam" (4.3), or "design" (4.0) rejections, decide:

**When to fix (usually the better path):**
- If you honestly agree the app could be more substantial
- If adding 2-3 features would make a meaningful difference
- If the reviewer's feedback, while harsh, has a point
- If you're early in development and can improve quickly

**When to push back:**
- If the app intentionally does one thing well (it's a focused tool, not incomplete)
- If similar apps exist on the App Store with less functionality
- If the reviewer appears to have missed core features
- If you have user testimonials or metrics showing the app delivers value

**Response template (Pushing Back on Subjective Rejection):**
```
Thank you for your feedback on our app.

We respectfully believe [App Name] provides meaningful
functionality as outlined in Guideline [X.X]:

1. [Core value proposition]
2. [Specific features that demonstrate depth]
3. [User benefit that differentiates from a simple website]

[App Name] is designed as a focus