marketingskills/skills/aso/references/scoring-criteria.md

ASO Scoring Criteria

Score each dimension 0-10 using the rubrics below. Apply brand maturity tier adjustments from Phase 1.5 of the main skill.

---

Brand Maturity Adjustments (apply to all dimensions)

Before scoring, determine the app's tier: Dominant, Established, or Challenger.

Dominant apps (Instagram, Uber, Spotify, WhatsApp, Netflix):

• Brand-only titles score 8+ (the brand IS the keyword)
• Lifestyle/brand screenshots score same as captioned UI screenshots
• Generic What's New at weekly+ cadence scores 8+
• Missing in-app events for utility apps is not a penalty
• Description scored on conversion quality only, not keyword presence
• Localization scored relative to actual market footprint
• Missing preview video is acceptable if brand awareness is near-universal

Established apps (Duolingo, Strava, Notion, Calm, Cash App):

• Brand-first titles with 1-2 keywords score normally
• Strategic description/visual choices get benefit of the doubt
• All other dimensions scored normally

Challenger apps (most apps):

• Scored strictly against textbook ASO — every character and feature matters

Key principle: Before docking points, ask: "Is this a mistake or a data-informed choice by a team with more information than I have?"

---

1. Title & Subtitle (Weight: 20%)

Challenger rubric:

Score	Criteria
9-10	Brand + high-value keyword in title, complementary keywords in subtitle, no word repetition across fields, near max character usage, instantly communicates app purpose
7-8	Good keyword presence, minor character waste (5+ unused chars), clear purpose
5-6	Has keywords but poor placement, some repetition between fields, purpose somewhat clear
3-4	Title is brand-only or generic, subtitle missing or weak, poor character usage
1-2	No keyword strategy, title doesn't communicate purpose, major character waste
0	Cannot assess (data unavailable)

Dominant/Established adjustment: Brand-only titles (e.g., "Instagram") are valid if the brand has high search volume. Score 8+ for Dominant apps where brand recognition eliminates the need for generic keywords. Evaluate whether unused characters represent waste or intentional simplicity.

Check for:

• Characters used vs limit (title: 30, subtitle/short desc: 30/80). "Near max" = within 3 chars of the limit (27+/30, 77+/80)
• Primary keyword in title
• Keyword duplication between title and subtitle
• Whether app purpose is immediately clear
• Unnecessary words (articles, prepositions) consuming space
• Special characters or claims ("#1", "best") that risk rejection (Apple)

---

2. Description (Weight: 15%)

Apple App Store

Score	Criteria
9-10	First 3 lines hook with clear value prop, structured with features/benefits/social proof/CTA, promotional text actively used, compelling and scannable
7-8	Good opening, decent structure, could improve scannability or CTA
5-6	Generic opening ("Welcome to..."), some structure, missing CTA or social proof
3-4	Wall of text, no clear value prop above fold, no promotional text
1-2	Minimal or boilerplate description, no effort
0	Cannot assess

Google Play

Score	Criteria
9-10	Keywords in first 3 sentences, 2-3% natural density throughout, HTML formatting used, structured sections, strong CTA, keywords feel natural
7-8	Good keyword presence, some structure, density slightly off (1-2% or 3-4%)
5-6	Keywords present but sparse (<1%) or stuffed (>5%), weak structure
3-4	No keyword strategy visible, poor formatting, wall of text
1-2	Minimal description, no keywords, no structure
0	Cannot assess

Check for:

• First 3 lines quality (visible before "Read More")
• Feature-benefit framing (not just feature lists)
• Social proof (downloads, awards, press mentions)
• Call to action
• Keyword density (Google Play only - count target keywords / total words)
• HTML formatting usage (Google Play)
• Promotional text presence and quality (Apple)

---

3. Visual Assets (Weight: 25%)

Score	Criteria
9-10	8-10 screenshots with clear messaging/captions, preview video present, screenshots tell a story in sequence, each communicates one benefit, icon is distinctive and memorable
7-8	6-7 screenshots with captions, good icon, no video OR good video but some screenshot messaging unclear
5-6	5+ screenshots but weak/no captions, basic icon, no video, screenshots are UI dumps
3-4	3-4 screenshots, no captions, generic icon, no storytelling
1-2	Fewer than 3 screenshots, or screenshots are raw unedited UI, poor icon
0	Cannot assess

Check for:

• Screenshot count (minimum 5, ideal 8-10)
• Caption/overlay text on screenshots (one message per screen, 5-7 words max)
• First 3 screenshots (highest conversion impact on Apple)
• Preview video presence and quality
• Icon distinctiveness (no text in icon, bold shapes, stands out)
• Feature graphic presence (Google Play - mandatory for featured placements)
• Screenshot storytelling flow (do they tell a coherent story?)
• Localized visual assets (for non-English markets)
• Caption keywords (Apple - indexed since June 2025)

---

4. Ratings & Reviews (Weight: 20%)

Score	Criteria
9-10	4.5+ stars, 10K+ ratings, recent reviews positive, developer responds to negatives, steady review flow
7-8	4.0-4.4 stars, 1K+ ratings, mostly positive recent reviews, some developer responses
5-6	3.5-3.9 stars, 500+ ratings, mixed recent reviews, no developer responses
3-4	3.0-3.4 stars, <500 ratings, negative themes in recent reviews
1-2	Below 3.0 stars, few ratings, no developer engagement, visible complaints
0	No ratings yet or cannot assess

Check for:

• Average rating (target: 4.0+ minimum, 4.5+ ideal)
• Total rating count
• Recent review sentiment (last 5-10 visible reviews)
• Common complaint themes (bugs, crashes, pricing, UX)
• Developer response presence and quality
• Rating trend (improving or declining, if visible)
• Review recency (fresh reviews signal active user base)

---

5. Metadata & Freshness (Weight: 10%)

Score	Criteria
9-10	Updated within last month, 10+ localizations, optimal category choice, in-app events/LiveOps active, data safety complete
7-8	Updated within 2 months, 5+ localizations, good category, data safety present
5-6	Updated within 3 months, 2-4 localizations, acceptable category
3-4	Updated 3-6 months ago, 1-2 localizations, possibly wrong category
1-2	Not updated in 6+ months, single language, poor category choice
0	Cannot assess

Check for:

• Last update date and recency
• Number of supported languages/localizations
• Category selection (is it the best fit? less competitive alternative?)
• In-app events (Apple) or promotional content (Google) presence
• Data safety / privacy nutrition label completeness
• Age rating appropriateness
• Version history quality (do release notes communicate value?)
• What's New text quality

---

6. Conversion Signals (Weight: 10%)

Score	Criteria
9-10	Clear value before download, transparent pricing/IAP, social proof visible (press, awards), download range suggests strong traction, developer credibility strong
7-8	Good value communication, pricing clear, some social proof
5-6	Value prop exists but weak, pricing unclear or IAP heavy, limited social proof
3-4	Unclear what user gets, confusing pricing, no social proof, low downloads visible
1-2	No value communication, suspicious pricing, app looks abandoned
0	Cannot assess

Check for:

• Price transparency (free, freemium, paid - is it clear?)
• In-app purchase list quality (do IAP names communicate value?)
• Download range (Google Play - 10K+, 100K+, 1M+ signals trust)
• Developer name/brand recognition
• "Editors' Choice" or featured badges
• Press mentions or awards in description
• Related apps from same developer (portfolio trust signal)
• Privacy practices transparency

---

Calculating Final Score

Final Score = (Title * 0.20) + (Description * 0.15) + (Visuals * 0.25)
            + (Ratings * 0.20) + (Metadata * 0.10) + (Conversion * 0.10)

Scale to 100: Final Score * 10

Example: Title: 7, Description: 6, Visuals: 8, Ratings: 9, Metadata: 5, Conversion: 7

(7 * 0.20) + (6 * 0.15) + (8 * 0.25) + (9 * 0.20) + (5 * 0.10) + (7 * 0.10)
= 1.4 + 0.9 + 2.0 + 1.8 + 0.5 + 0.7
= 7.3 → 73/100 → Grade: B