WhenToWork Employee Scheduling
Ultimate Scheduling Solution
Your score
Shaky. 11 of 43 checks need attention.
WhenToWork Employee Scheduling
Business · US
- Discoverability64.7
Top 5 for 3 of 6 terms · 95% of characters
- First impression66.1
icon 100, shot 1 58, subtitle 45 of 100
- Credibility55.6
3.2★ from 491 ratings
- Clarity73.8
4 of 6 viewers described it correctly
- Competitiveness11.2
Picked 0 of 2 shelf runs · 28th pct
Working
- Your app name uses 30 of 30 characters. That's a good use of the highest-weighted field you have.
- You have a subtitle. Good, most indie apps don't.
Not working
- You're at 3.2 stars. Below 3.5 nothing else on this page matters. About half of users won't consider a 3-star app at all, and you're invisible to editorial featuring, where 95% of picks are 4.0+. Fix the rating first; every other recommendation in this report is downstream of it.
- One word appears in more than one indexed field ("scheduling"), costing you roughly 11 characters. Apple counts each word once and says plainly not to repeat words from your name, subtitle or category. Delete the repeats and spend the space on new terms.
Leaderboard rank
See the full board →- #58Sprig: Private Meeting Notes58.7

- #59WhenToWork Employee Schedulingthis app56.3

- #60realxreal: MFA & Codewords54.8

The shelf
3 of 3 simulated users picked a rival off this row.
Search results · US · Business
They were asked to find: “You need to send invoices and know who has actually paid you.”
Your taps
Where the taps went
- Humanity Schedule by TCP4/6
- When I Work Staff Scheduling1/6
- Deputy: Shift Schedule Maker1/6
- WhenToWork Employee Schedulingyou0/6
Fix these first
5 changes, in order of impact.
Rating average
+10–35% est.You're at 3.2 stars. Below 3.5 nothing else on this page matters. About half of users won't consider a 3-star app at all, and you're invisible to editorial featuring, where 95% of picks are 4.0+. Fix the rating first; every other recommendation in this report is downstream of it. Fix the rating before anything else on this page. Below 4.0 stars, creative advice is noise.
conversionStrong evidenceCategory choice sanity
Nothing in your name, subtitle or description sounds like a Business app. Both categories are indexed, and App Review treats an irrelevant category as grounds for rejection. Check that this is really where you belong, and if it is, say so in your own words. Make sure your primary category matches what your listing says you do, and set a secondary category. Both are indexed, and an irrelevant one is grounds for rejection.
visibilityApple-documentedCross-index locales unused
You're publishing in one language, and the United States storefront supports 9 more. Each missing one is another 30-character name, 30-character subtitle and 100-character keyword field: 1,440 indexable characters you're leaving on the table in the same storefront, without translating your app. Missing: Arabic, Chinese (Simplified), Chinese (Traditional), French, Korean, Portuguese (Brazil), Russian, Spanish (Mexico), Vietnamese. Add metadata in your storefront's additional supported languages. Each one is another 160 indexable characters (30 name + 30 subtitle + 100 keywords) in the same storefront.
visibilityIndustry consensusNo functional word in name + subtitle
Nothing in your name or subtitle says what the app actually does. It reads as a brand plus adjectives. Those 60 characters are the only text on your search card, so a stranger has to guess, and Apple's text matching has nothing to work with. Put one word in your name or subtitle that says what the app does: the verb or the noun someone would type into search.
visibilityIndustry consensusSocial proof is the weakest part of your listing
Social proof scores 0/100. Weakest: 3.20★; ~50% of users won't consider a 3★ app; 95% of featured apps are 4.0+; 491 ratings vs a top-5 median of 27,428 (2%). What the review actually saw: 3.20★; ~50% of users won't consider a 3★ app; 95% of featured apps are 4.0+; 491 ratings vs a top-5 median of 27,428 (2%).
conversionOur proposal
What simulated users said
0 of 6 would tap your card; 0 of 6 would install.
Skeptical Researcher
38, product manager · reads the one-stars first (the control persona)
“A 3.2 rating with nearly 500 people rating it tells me something's wrong, and I'm not going to find out what by tapping.”
- The card
- would not tap
- The page
- did not open it
Skeptical Researcher
38, product manager · reads the one-stars first (the control persona)
“I'm not installing something with a 3.2 star average when my schedule is on the line.”
- The card
- would not tap
- The page
- did not open it
Price-Sensitive Pragmatist
29, gig worker · goes straight to the in-app purchase list
“A 3.2 star rating on nearly 500 reviews tells me something's broken, and I'm not going to find out what by installing it.”
- The card
- would not tap
- The page
- did not open it
Price-Sensitive Pragmatist
29, gig worker · goes straight to the in-app purchase list
“It's free but the reviews say it's confusing and breaks things like shift trades, so I'd rather just use the website.”
- The card
- would not tap
- The page
- did not open it
Power User
31, developer · actually reads the description
“I can see my shifts and get messages, but I can't actually do anything with them—no clocking in, no editing, no syncing to my calendar, just reading what someone else made.”
- The card
- would not tap
- The page
- did not open it
Power User
31, developer · actually reads the description
“The screenshots show a clean schedule view, but the reviews are telling me the core features don't actually work reliably.”
- The card
- would not tap
- The page
- did not open it