Originality check

Skill rshankras/claude-code-apple-skills/skills/app-store/originality-check

Guideline-4.3 anti-spam / originality gate — score whether an app (and each portfolio addition) is meaningfully distinct in function, content, and metadata before you invest or submit. Use at validation/new-app time and again before submission. Protects the whole developer account from 4.3 (spam/duplicate) rejections. NOT rejection-handler (that works an existing rejection) and NOT competitive-analysis (that positions in the market).From its SKILL.md

Install

npx -y skills add rshankras/claude-code-apple-skills --skill originality-check

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

SKILL.md

4.1 KB, 847 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

Originality Check

Decide, with evidence, whether an app is distinct enough to exist — before you build it or submit it.

At portfolio scale, shipping many similar small apps risks Guideline 4.3 (spam / duplicate) — this is the go/no-go distinctness gate that keeps that from happening.

Where it fits (read the seams)

Not rejection-handler. That works a rejection you already have. This is upstream — it prevents the 4.3 by catching sameness before you ship.
Not competitive-analysis / market-research. Those size demand and position you in the market. This judges distinctness (function + content + metadata) vs your own portfolio and vs near-identical competitors — a spam risk, not a demand question.
Two moments to run it: at validate / new-app (don't build a dup) and before submit (don't trip 4.3). Also periodically across the portfolio (internal cannibalization / template-sameness).

Prerequisites

The app idea or a shipped app to evaluate (name, one-line function, target metadata).
Optional: .planning/VALIDATION.md (competitor + market data). If missing/stale, gather fresh via WebSearch or the product/competitive-analysis skill.
Optional ASC access to read the developer's existing portfolio (list_apps / get_metadata).

Flow

Internal check (your own portfolio). list_apps → for each shipped app read its positioning (get_metadata). Does the candidate overlap one you already ship in function, code template, or metadata? Two apps that differ only in theme/reskin = 4.3 risk.
External check (the market). Read VALIDATION.md if present; otherwise WebSearch for close look-alikes. Judge: is the core function a thin reskin of an existing app, or a genuine wedge?

Distinctness scorecard. Score each dimension meaningful difference vs cosmetic, and flag any that is only skin-deep:

Dimension	Distinct if…
Function	it does something materially different, not a template swap
Content / data	unique data or content, not a generic wrapper
Metadata	name / keywords / screenshots not near-identical to siblings or competitors
UX / value	a real reason a user picks this one

Verdict + remedy.
- Distinct → proceed.
- Borderline → give concrete ways to differentiate (merge sibling apps into one configurable app, add the unique wedge, or drop it); if approved, name the specific wedge that MUST be built to clear 4.3.
- Duplicate → recommend not shipping; consolidate any existing thin apps into one strong app instead.
Record. Write the verdict + reasoning to .planning/ (VALIDATION or STATE). For a borderline-approved app, record the wedge as a build requirement so plan/build deliver it.

Done

A written verdict (distinct / borderline+wedge / duplicate) with per-dimension reasoning, and — if borderline — the specific differentiation that must ship before submission.

Caveats

Cosmetic theming ≠ differentiation — Apple judges function + metadata similarity, not intent.
Protect the account. When in doubt between "borderline ship" and "consolidate," prefer one strong app over several thin ones.
Guideline numbers/text drift — confirm current 4.3 wording at the App Review Guidelines (captured 2026-07).

What ships with it

Read from the repository

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

Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most quality gates skills give in 847 tokens

Counted across 1,524 of the 2,830 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-09-06

Read full output and check exit codein 45 of 1524, across 40 files
Verify output confirms the claimin 44 of 1524, across 39 files
Identify the command that proves the claimin 43 of 1524, across 39 files
Execute the full verification commandin 36 of 1524, across 30 files
Produce a verification reportin 34 of 1524, across 18 files
Review git diff changesin 30 of 1524, across 16 files
Fix build failures immediatelyin 29 of 1524, across 9 files
Group findings by severityin 28 of 1524
State claim only with evidencein 27 of 1524, across 22 files
Verify regression tests with red-green cyclein 26 of 1524, across 22 files
Run the full test suitein 26 of 1524, across 25 files
Run test suite with coveragein 25 of 1524, across 10 files

Said here and by no other author read

List existing apps in the portfolio
Compare candidate app against existing portfolio
Search for external look-alike applications
Score function content and metadata for distinctness
Flag apps that are only skin-deep
Recommend consolidation for duplicate apps

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.