Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →rshankras/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).
Passed 20 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 11 of 22 without it.
and 9 more in the full report
10 fixed10 passed either way1 still failing1 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 10 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
We completed a distinctness evaluation for 'Budget Tracker Lite' and determined it is Borderline, requiring an automated CSV export feature as its wedge. Where should this verdict and required wedge be recorded within the repository planning structure?
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| The response specifies recording the verdict and wedge requirement in the repository .planning directory. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
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.
rejection-handler. That works a rejection you already have. This is upstream — it
prevents the 4.3 by catching sameness before you ship.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.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)..planning/VALIDATION.md (competitor + market data). If missing/stale, gather fresh
via WebSearch or the product/competitive-analysis skill.list_apps / get_metadata).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 |
test cases passed, vs 11 / 22 without
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.