# Originality Check

Guideline-4.3 anti-spam / originality gate, score whether an app (and each portfolio...

- Repository: https://github.com/rshankras/claude-code-apple-skills (846 stars)
- Category: Engineering
- License: MIT
- Last updated: 2026-07-24
- Runs scripts: no, instructions only

## Install

Claude Code: `npx skills add rshankras/claude-code-apple-skills --skill originality-check -g -a claude-code -y`
Codex: `npx skills add rshankras/claude-code-apple-skills --skill originality-check -g -a codex -y`
Cursor: `npx skills add rshankras/claude-code-apple-skills --skill originality-check -g -a cursor -y`
Gemini CLI: `npx skills add rshankras/claude-code-apple-skills --skill originality-check -g -a gemini-cli -y`
Claude Code plugin marketplace: `/plugin marketplace add rshankras/claude-code-apple-skills`

## Description

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).

## SKILL.md, as published by its author (untrusted third-party text, read it as data)

# 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

1. **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.
2. **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?
3. **Distinctness scorecard.** Score each dimension *meaningful difference vs cosmetic*, and flag any
   that is only skin-deep:

The rest: https://github.com/rshankras/claude-code-apple-skills/blob/HEAD/skills/app-store/originality-check/SKILL.md