Store rejection appeal examples,
without the legal fluff.

Reviewer concern

The listing and permission rationale do not clearly explain why tab access is required.

What changed

• Removed broad host permissions not required for the core workflow.
• Rewrote the listing text to explain the tab-based save/group flow explicitly.
• Added a release checklist so future updates include policy-copy review before submit.

Appeal excerpt

Dear Chrome Web Store Developer Support Team, Thank you for flagging the unclear permission explanation. We reviewed both the listing and the manifest, removed non-essential host permissions, and rewrote the listing copy so it now states exactly why tab access is required for the save-and-group workflow. We also added an internal policy review step for future submissions. We believe the updated listing and permission set now address the concern and respectfully request a fresh review.

Reviewer concern

The readme overstates what the plugin does and the admin screen does not clearly explain the external API dependency.

What changed

• Removed exaggerated readme claims and aligned screenshots to shipped features only.
• Added plain-English disclosure for the external API dependency inside admin settings.
• Reduced persistent upsell notices so the plugin no longer dominates the admin flow.

Appeal excerpt

Hello Plugin Review Team, Thank you for the detailed feedback. We updated the plugin to address the noted concerns in three places: the readme now reflects only shipped functionality, the admin settings screen now explains the external API dependency in plain language, and the persistent promotional notice was removed from the primary admin workflow. If you re-check the current version and readme, you should see the plugin now aligns with the review guidance. We would appreciate another review when convenient.

Reviewer concern

The submission did not make the extension easy to test, and the reviewer could not verify the gated workflow from the provided materials.

What changed

• Added reviewer test credentials and a direct path to the gated feature inside the notes.
• Clarified the permission and data-flow explanation in the listing copy.
• Removed one non-essential prompt so the first-use path is now easier to verify during certification.

Appeal excerpt

Dear Microsoft Edge Add-ons Review Team, Thank you for the certification feedback. We updated the submission so the review path is now easier to validate: the notes now include direct test credentials and an exact path to the gated workflow, the listing copy explains the permission and data flow more clearly, and one non-essential first-use prompt was removed to reduce friction during review. We believe the updated package and reviewer notes now address the testability concern and respectfully request a fresh certification review.

Reviewer concern

The metadata suggests a feature is available without the necessary account state, and the reviewer could not complete the test flow.

What changed

• Updated metadata to remove wording that implied wider access than the shipped state supports.
• Added an in-app explanation when a required account condition is missing.
• Included fresh reviewer test credentials plus a step-by-step path to reproduce the fixed flow.

Appeal excerpt

Dear App Store Review Team, Thank you for the review and for explaining where the test flow broke down. We updated the metadata to more accurately describe feature availability, added an in-app explanation for the required account state, and prepared fresh reviewer credentials so the corrected flow can be tested directly. We believe the latest build now resolves the concern and respectfully request a new review of the updated submission.