Generated from Content Formatting Toolkit for Confluence's audit data
Content Formatting Toolkit for Confluence scores 60/100 across 6 category checks, which tracks in the middle band, with 3 of 6 categories below the headline. Strengths: title optimization holds at 88/100, so the listing isn't fundamentally broken — the lift is in tightening specific weaknesses. Watch-items: languages (0/100) and technical & support (50/100) drag the average down; lifting languages is the single largest available lever. Per-category breakdown below.
This is an independent listing audit for Content Formatting Toolkit for Confluence on Atlassian. It scored 60/100 (grade C) on today's snapshot. Top strength: Title Optimization at 88/100. Biggest gap: Languages at 0/100. We re-audit every 24 hours from the canonical Atlassian listing.
Six weighted areas, pass / warning / fail per check, tiers at 85 / 65. Full methodology · Glossary
Last updated: September 10, 2026
Content Formatting Toolkit for Confluence's overall score of 60/100 is a mid-tier result — the listing is functional but multiple categories have headroom, computed as the weighted average of 6 category checks. The spread is highly polarized across categories — 3 categories score above the headline number and 3 score below. The strongest category is Title Optimization (88/100, +28 vs overall); the weakest is Languages (0/100), a 60-point gap below the headline score — the largest single lever. Top three by score: Title Optimization (88), Description & Content (80), Categories & Discoverability (63).
Scoring criteria, category weightings, and the full rubric (identical across every Atlassian Marketplace listing AppRanks audits) are documented on the methodology page and the audit-score glossary entry. Disputes or data corrections: [email protected].
Content Formatting Toolkit for Confluence scored 60/100 in the AppRanks listing audit — a mid-tier result with room to improve. The score is the weighted average of 6 category checks: Title Optimization 88/100, Description & Content 80/100, Visual Assets 50/100, Categories & Discoverability 63/100, Technical & Support 50/100, Languages 0/100. Each category is scored against a fixed rubric that is identical for every app on the platform, so scores are directly comparable across Atlassian listings.
Content Formatting Toolkit for Confluence's strongest audit area is Title Optimization, scored at 88/100. Of the 4 checks AppRanks runs in this category, 3 pass cleanly, with the remainder in warning rather than failing state. This is the dimension a competing listing would need to match before Content Formatting Toolkit for Confluence loses its current edge in this category.
The weakest area in Content Formatting Toolkit for Confluence's audit is Languages, scored at 0/100. The failing checks are language count, each with a concrete fix described below. Tightening this category is the highest-impact change available to the listing — its weight in the overall score makes it the lever most likely to move the headline number on the next refresh.