Generated from Hunter for Sheets™'s audit data
Hunter for Sheets™ scores 58/100 across 6 category checks, which tracks in the middle band, with 2 of 6 categories below the headline. Strengths: visual assets holds at 75/100, so the listing isn't fundamentally broken — the lift is in tightening specific weaknesses. Watch-items: languages (0/100) and technical & support (42/100) drag the average down; lifting languages is the single largest available lever. Per-category breakdown below.
This is an independent listing audit for Hunter for Sheets™ on Google Workspace. It scored 58/100 (grade C) on today's snapshot. Top strength: Visual Assets at 75/100. Biggest gap: Languages at 0/100. We re-audit every 24 hours from the canonical Google Workspace listing.
Six weighted areas, pass / warning / fail per check, tiers at 85 / 65. Full methodology · Glossary
Last updated: September 8, 2026
Hunter for Sheets™'s overall score of 58/100 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 — 4 categories score above the headline number and 2 score below. The strongest category is Visual Assets (75/100, +17 vs overall); the weakest is Languages (0/100), a 58-point gap below the headline score — the largest single lever. Top three by score: Visual Assets (75), Description & Content (70), Title Optimization (63).
Scoring criteria, category weightings, and the full rubric (identical across every Google Workspace Marketplace listing AppRanks audits) are documented on the methodology page and the audit-score glossary entry. Disputes or data corrections: [email protected].
Hunter for Sheets™ scored 58/100 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 63/100, Description & Content 70/100, Visual Assets 75/100, Categories & Discoverability 63/100, Technical & Support 42/100, 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 Google_workspace listings.
Hunter for Sheets™'s strongest audit area is Visual Assets, scored at 75/100. Of the 4 checks AppRanks runs in this category, 2 pass cleanly, with the remainder in warning rather than failing state. This is the dimension a competing listing would need to match before Hunter for Sheets™ loses its current edge in this category.
The weakest area in Hunter for Sheets™'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.