I’m developing a sandboxed macOS application intended for distribution through the Mac App Store.
The app integrates with Claude Desktop using Anthropic’s official Desktop Extension format (.mcpb).
Anthropic supports installing a Desktop Extension by opening the .mcpb file, after which Claude Desktop presents its own installation and user-consent UI.
I’m trying to clarify one Mac App Store distribution point before we commit to the final onboarding flow.
Would a Mac App Store application be permitted to:
include its own pre-signed .mcpb Desktop Extension as a resource inside the application bundle; and
after an explicit user action, open that bundled resource using standard macOS APIs so that Claude Desktop presents its installation dialog?
The Mac App Store application would not:
silently install software;
modify Claude Desktop configuration;
automate Claude Desktop’s UI;
download or modify executable code after App Review;
bypass Claude’s installation or tool-consent prompts.
The .mcpb and the helper executable it contains would already be included and code signed before App Store submission.
My question is specifically whether this would be considered using the Mac App Store app as an impermissible software-distribution mechanism, or whether this explicit handoff to another installed macOS application is acceptable.
If bundling/opening the .mcpb is not acceptable, is there an Apple-recommended pattern for this kind of handoff to another installed application?
I’m not asking for implementation help; the technical flow already works in development. I’m trying to qualify the Mac App Store distribution model before productizing the installation UX.
Topic:
App Store Distribution & Marketing
SubTopic:
App Review
4
0
451