agentsclimarketplace

App review analyzer

Skill bg-szy/TOP-SKILLS/skills/claude-code-toolkit/app-review-analyzer

全球最大的 Claude Code 技能聚合库 · 收录 3900+ 来自 12+ 来源的技能,提供在线搜索与趋势分析看板 / The world's largest Claude Code skill aggregation hub — 3900+ skills from 12+ sources with online search and trend dashboardFrom the repository description

Install
npx -y skills add bg-szy/TOP-SKILLS --skill app-review-analyzer

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

2 things to look at

  • no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
  • 5 stars5 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

SKILL.md

6.4 KB, ~1.3k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

Prerequisites

  • Chrome browser with Claude in Chrome extension (for reading store reviews)
  • No API keys required — all analysis is done through live browser interaction
  • Supports iOS App Store and Google Play Store

Mode Selection

Ask the user which mode they need:

  1. Competitive Analysis — Analyze a competitor's reviews to find gaps and opportunities
  2. Own App Management — Analyze your own app's reviews to prioritize fixes, surface feature requests, and draft professional responses

If the user provides a competitor's app, use Competitive Analysis mode. If they mention "my app" or "our app," use Own App Management mode.


Competitive Analysis Mode

Step 1: Navigate to the App Listing

Open the app's store page in Chrome:

  • iOS App Store: Search on apps.apple.com or use a direct link
  • Google Play: Search on play.google.com or use a direct link

Confirm the correct app with the user before proceeding.

Step 2: Collect Reviews Systematically

Read reviews in two passes:

  1. Most Recent — Sort by newest first. Read at least 30-50 reviews to capture current sentiment.
  2. Most Critical — Sort by lowest rating (1-star, then 2-star). Read at least 20-30 critical reviews to surface pain points.

For each review, note:

  • Star rating
  • Date posted
  • Review text (key quotes)
  • Whether the developer responded

Step 3: Categorize Reviews

Assign each review to one or more theme categories:

CategorySignals
Bug ReportsCrashes, errors, data loss, freezing, sync failures
Missing Features"I wish it had...", "Why can't I...", "Needs..."
UX Complaints"Too complicated", "Can't find...", "Confusing", "Slow"
Pricing Objections"Too expensive", "Not worth it", "Used to be free"
PraiseSpecific features users love, "best app for...", loyalty signals
Support Complaints"No response", "Unhelpful", "Can't reach anyone"

Step 4: Produce the Analysis Report

Generate a structured report using the template in references/analysis-report-template.md. The report must include:

  1. Theme Frequency Table — Count of reviews per category, sorted by frequency
  2. Sentiment Trend — Are recent reviews better or worse than older ones?
  3. Top 5 Pain Points — With direct quotes from reviews
  4. Top 5 Praised Features — Competitor strengths you must match or exceed
  5. Opportunity Summary — Gaps you could fill, weaknesses to exploit

Own App Management Mode

Step 1: Navigate to Your App's Reviews

Open your app's store page in Chrome. Confirm the correct app.

Step 2: Collect and Categorize Reviews

Follow the same collection process as Competitive Analysis (Steps 2-3 above).

Step 3: Prioritize Issues

Score each theme by Frequency x Severity:

SeverityDefinition
Critical (3)Data loss, crashes, security issues, payment failures
High (2)Core functionality broken, major UX blockers
Medium (1)Nice-to-have features, minor annoyances, cosmetic issues

Calculate priority score: count of reviews in theme x severity weight

Sort themes by priority score descending. This is the fix-first order.

Step 4: Draft Review Responses

For each negative review (1-3 stars), draft a response following the templates in references/response-templates.md.

Key response principles:

  • Respond within 24-48 hours — speed improves update likelihood
  • Never be defensive or argumentative
  • Personalize every response — reference specific details from their review
  • Acknowledge the problem before offering solutions
  • Include a direct contact method for follow-up when appropriate
  • Keep responses concise (2-4 sentences for most cases)

Platform-specific notes:

  • iOS App Store: Developer responses appear publicly under the review. Users receive a notification and can update their rating.
  • Google Play: Developer responses also appear publicly. You can report policy-violating reviews (spam, off-topic, profanity) via the Play Console.

Step 5: Produce the Action Plan

Generate a report using references/analysis-report-template.md with an additional action plan section:

  1. Fix First — Critical bugs and top pain points by priority score
  2. Add Next — Most-requested features with user quotes as evidence
  3. Communicate — Issues that need a public response or in-app messaging
  4. Monitor — Themes to watch in future review cycles

Review Category Quick Reference

Use this decision tree when categorizing ambiguous reviews:

Review mentions a crash/error/data loss?
  → Bug Report

Review says "I wish" or "please add" or "why can't I"?
  → Missing Feature

Review says "confusing" or "hard to use" or "can't find"?
  → UX Complaint

Review mentions price, subscription, cost, or payment?
  → Pricing Objection

Review says "no response" or "support" or "help"?
  → Support Complaint

Review is purely positive with no complaints?
  → Praise

Review has multiple themes?
  → Assign all applicable categories

Resources

references/

  • response-templates.md — Detailed response templates for every review category with multiple variants each. Load when drafting review responses.
  • analysis-report-template.md — Full markdown template for the analysis report output. Load when producing the final report.

What ships with it

Read from the repository

Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.

Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most review quality skills give in ~1.3k tokens

Counted across 1,048 of the 1,783 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-07

  • Ask questions one at a timein 81 of 1048, across 64 files
  • Provide a recommended answer for each questionin 73 of 1048, across 50 files
  • Explore the codebase instead of asking answerable questionsin 66 of 1048, across 42 files
  • Resolve dependencies between decisions one-by-onein 42 of 1048, across 17 files
  • Interview the user relentlessly about the planin 38 of 1048, across 13 files
  • Order findings by severityin 31 of 1048
  • Resolve each branch of the decision treein 27 of 1048, across 5 files
  • Run a grilling sessionin 26 of 1048, across 5 files
  • Update CONTEXT.md immediately when a term is resolvedin 26 of 1048, across 11 files
  • Propose precise canonical terms for vague languagein 25 of 1048, across 7 files
  • Create documentation files lazilyin 24 of 1048, across 5 files
  • Assign severity to every findingin 24 of 1048

Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 326,614. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.