App review rejection
The store denies your build and cites a guideline number, blocking release until you fix it, explain yourself, or appeal.
See it
What it is
A reviewer denies the build and posts a guideline number plus a sentence or two. The release is blocked until you fix it and resubmit, or argue successfully. The repeat offenders on iOS: 2.1 App Completeness, a broad bucket covering crashes, dead ends, placeholder text, missing metadata, and builds that are clearly unfinished, with 'the reviewer could not get past your login' being only the most common single cause, 4.3 spam or 'too similar to other apps', 5.1.1 demanding data or an account you do not need for the feature, and 3.1.1 taking payment for digital goods outside in-app purchase. On Play: permissions you cannot justify, a data safety form that does not match the SDKs in your bundle, and declarations that contradict what the app does.
Read the guideline number first, not the prose. It tells you whether this is a five-minute metadata fix, a new build, or a product argument. You answer in Resolution Center on iOS or a policy appeal on Play, and you can appeal an interpretation separately from shipping a fix. A 30-second screen recording showing the reviewer the flow they missed resolves more 2.1 rejections than any essay.
Gotcha: rejection is not a ban, and panic-deleting the feature they questioned is usually the wrong move. The real cost is the clock, since each resubmission re-enters the queue. Also, reviewers are on real devices with bad networks and no seed data, so an empty state that looks broken reads as a crash.
Ask AI for it
Here is the rejection message I received from [App Review / Google Play policy]: [paste the full message]. Do four things. (1) Name the exact guideline or policy it maps to and say in plain language what the reviewer believes is wrong. (2) List the 3 most likely concrete causes in an app that does [describe app]. (3) For each cause, give the smallest change that resolves it and say whether it needs a new build or is metadata only. (4) Draft a Resolution Center reply under 150 words: factual, no apologising, naming the exact screen and steps to reproduce, with a demo account line and an offer of a screen recording.