Publishing Your Chrome Extension: A Real-World Journey - Bala Murali

So you’ve built a Chrome extension.

Maybe it’s a tiny productivity helper. Or maybe you’ve gone full detective mode like I did with my Factors SDK Debugger – a utility that sniffs out analytics SDK implementations, monitors network calls, and tracks form submissions. It’s the kind of tool that gives you X-ray vision for web pages.

Now comes the fun part: getting it into the Chrome Web Store.

On paper, it sounds simple: zip it, upload it, done.

In reality? Not quite. Here’s what actually happens.

The “Simple” Process (And Where It Gets Messy)

Step 1: The $5 Toll Booth

First, you need a developer account. Google charges a one-time $5 registration fee. Think of it as a “I’m serious about this” filter.

You’ll also want a dedicated email address – something you actually check – because that’s where Google sends important alerts, policy warnings, and rejection emails.

Step 2: Packaging Your Baby

You zip your extension folder, making sure manifest.json is at the root (not tucked away in some nested folder).

Easy enough.

But this is where things start to get interesting once your extension isn’t just a “hello world” popup.

For my SDK debugger, the manifest asks for some pretty heavy permissions:

<all_urls> (to monitor any website)
webRequest (to intercept network calls)
cookies
storage
tabs

These aren’t your typical “let me access this one site” permissions.

These are more like “I want to see everything that’s going on in the browser.” And Google is very suspicious of that.

Step 3: The Privacy Tab Interrogation

This is where a lot of extensions quietly die.

The Chrome Web Store has a “Privacy” section where you must declare your data practices. For every permission and every bit of data, you need to explain:

Why you need it
What data you collect
How you use that data
Whether you sell or share it (ideally: you don’t)

My extension captures network calls, form data, and cookies. I had to write what felt like a small essay explaining that:

It’s a debugging tool
Data never leaves the user’s machine
Nothing is sent to external servers
Everything is meant for the user’s own debugging and analysis

The more transparent and specific you are here, the better your chances.

Step 4: The Waiting Game

You hit “Publish” and… then you wait.

Review times can range from a few hours to several days. During that time, Google’s review bots (and sometimes actual humans) are poking at your extension, scanning:

Your permissions
Your code (at least to some extent)
Your screenshots and description
Your privacy policy

They’re basically looking for any sign that you’re violating policies or doing something sketchy.

The Challenges Nobody Warns You About

This is the part people usually only learn the hard way.

1. The Permission Justification Gauntlet

This is the number one killer.

Google will reject your extension if your requested permissions aren’t narrowly scoped or clearly justified. Even if your extension genuinely needs broad access, you have to justify every single permission like you’re defending it in court.

Common rejection reason:
“Your product violates the ‘Use of Permissions’ section of the policy.”

Rough translation:
“You’re asking for a lot, and your explanation is too vague.”

How to fix it:
Be comically, almost painfully specific.

Bad:

I need storage to store data.

Better:

I use storage to persist user preferences across sessions, including:

Configured API endpoints

Filter and search settings

A small session history (up to 100 entries), which is auto-deleted after 24 hours

Apply that level of detail to every permission.

2. The `<all_urls>` Death Sentence

Requesting <all_urls> or patterns like http://*/ and https://*/ is a massive red flag.

Google’s default assumption is: “Why do you need access to everything?”

If your extension legitimately needs full web access (like a debugging tool does), you’ll need to:

Explain exactly why you need access on any site
Make it clear that users opt in to monitoring (not silently spying)
Show visible UI indicators when your extension is active
Consider using activeTab instead, if your use case allows it

If you really must use <all_urls>, assume you’ll have to defend that choice in detail in your listing and privacy section.

3. The Privacy Policy Vacuum

No privacy policy? Expect an automatic rejection.

Even if your extension is free.
Even if it’s only used internally.
Even if you swear you don’t track anything.

You need a publicly accessible privacy policy URL that clearly explains:

What data you collect (be explicit: network data, form fields, cookies, etc.)
How you collect it (content scripts, network interception, DOM scanning, etc.)
Where it is stored (local storage, synced storage, external servers, etc.)
How long you keep it (e.g., “auto-deleted after 24 hours”)
Whether you share it with third parties (ideally: “no”)

You don’t need a 30-page legal document, but you do need something clear, honest, and easily accessible.

4. The “Single Purpose” Trap

Chrome extensions are supposed to have a single, well-defined purpose.

My SDK debugger:

Detects SDK installations
Monitors network calls
Tracks form submissions

That sounds like three different things, but I had to frame it as one coherent purpose:

“Debugging and verifying analytics SDK implementations.”

If your extension:

Blocks ads
Manages passwords
Changes themes
Plays music
And tracks crypto prices

…you’re going to get flagged. Split multi-purpose extensions into separate ones or tie everything tightly to one clear, central purpose.

5. The Content Security Policy Tango

If your extension injects scripts into web pages (for example, an interceptor.js running in the MAIN world), you’re going to run into Content Security Policy (CSP).

Modern sites often have strict CSP headers that block:

Inline scripts
Certain remote resources
Suspicious or untrusted script injection

A common workaround is to configure your content script with world: "MAIN" and then inject your script via a <script> tag. This lets your code run in the same context as the site’s scripts.

But doing this means:

You’re bypassing some of the normal isolation
You need to be extra careful not to introduce security risks
You should clearly explain in your privacy policy what’s happening and why

Google will look at this closely, so don’t be vague about it.

6. The Reviewer Whack-a-Mole

Sometimes you’ll get rejected for reasons that feel… odd.

One developer reportedly got flagged because their extension description said it “requires local storage.” Not because it actually used storage, but because of how the description was phrased. The word “require” can sometimes trip automated checks and make it sound like you’re hoarding user data.

Pro tip:
Have a friend or teammate review your Chrome Web Store listing. Fresh eyes catch:

Vague phrases
Overly aggressive wording
Things that might sound sketchy to an automated system

Small wording tweaks can make a big difference.

7. The Manifest Version Vortex

Manifest V3 is now the standard. If you’re still on V2, you’re not going anywhere.

V3 changes how extensions work, especially around:

Background pages (now service workers)
Remote code execution restrictions
Network-related APIs

I had to completely refactor my extension from V2 to V3, moving from persistent background pages to service workers and redesigning how I capture network calls.

If you’re starting fresh, start with V3 from day one. It’s painful to retrofit later.

8. The Screenshot Perfection Requirement

You technically need at least one screenshot to publish, but realistically you want 3–5 solid ones showing your extension in action.

The Chrome Web Store has some annoyingly specific requirements. Your screenshots should:

Be exactly 1280×800 or 640×400 pixels
Clearly show your extension’s UI
Avoid showing browser chrome (address bar, tabs, bookmarks, etc.)
Be real screenshots, not just pretty mockups

For my SDK debugger, I had to stage specific “scenes”:

Detecting a GTM-based SDK implementation
Capturing a form submission
Displaying decoded network payloads

It feels like overkill, but good screenshots really do help both with approval and discoverability.

9. The Description SEO Balancing Act

Your manifest’s name and description are indexed by the Chrome Web Store search. You want them to:

Contain relevant keywords
Still sound natural and human
Explain what the extension actually does

Bad:

SDK Debugger Tool for Analytics

Better:

Factors SDK Debugger – Debug Analytics Implementations & Monitor Network Calls

Your long description supports basic formatting, so use headings and bullet points to make it scannable. Avoid keyword stuffing – Google doesn’t like that either.

10. The Trusted Tester Escape Hatch

If you’re building an internal tool like mine (primarily for your own team), you may not need full public publication.

You can:

Publish to trusted testers only
Use private domain publication so only people in your organization can install it
Keep it semi-private while still distributing updates through the Web Store

This route can reduce friction with reviews and still give you a smooth install/update experience, at the cost of a smaller audience.

How to Not Lose Your Mind

A bit of prep work goes a long way.

Before You Hit Publish

Do these things first:

Run the Chrome Extension Lighthouse audit
There’s an audit specifically for extensions. It checks performance and best practices.
Test in a clean Chrome profile
No other extensions, no cached data. This helps you catch issues you might miss in your daily driver profile.
Document every permission in a separate file
Write down why you need each permission and what data it touches. Then copy-paste that into the privacy section and your store listing.
Record a short demo video
Optional, but it’s handy if your extension ever reaches manual review. It also helps you explain the extension to users.
Compress your screenshots
There are file size limits. Optimized images load faster and keep the upload process painless.

If You Get Rejected

Don’t take it personally. Rejection is almost part of the process.

Most rejections are due to:

Vague or incomplete permission explanations
Missing or weak privacy policy
Wrong screenshot sizes or low-quality images

Read the rejection email carefully, fix exactly what’s mentioned, and resubmit.

There’s no penalty for multiple submissions, as long as you’re actually addressing the issues and not trying to sneak around policies.

The Automated Submission Shortcut

Once your extension is live, you don’t want to manually upload zips forever.

After the first manual submission, you can set up GitHub Actions (or any CI/CD pipeline) to automate future updates.

You’ll need:

Google API credentials
Your extension ID
A refresh token

The pipeline can:

Build your extension
Zip it
Upload it to the Web Store
Submit it for review automatically

The first time is always manual, but after that, you can treat Chrome Web Store publishing like any other deployment step.

My Extension’s War Story

The Factors SDK Debugger exists because our team kept asking the same questions:

“Is the SDK installed?”
“Is it loaded manually or via GTM?”
“Are the network calls going through?”
“What data is actually being sent?”
“Why aren’t our forms being tracked?”

I built the extension to answer those questions automatically.

It:

Detects whether the SDK is installed manually, via GTM, or both
Monitors SDK-related network calls
Decodes and displays payloads
Tracks form submissions (even in more complex setups)
Acts as a forensic tool for analytics implementation

Publishing it internally was easy.

Getting it Web Store–ready? That took work – and three rejections.

First rejection: “Permissions too broad.”
I had to expand my privacy and description section from a short paragraph into several detailed explanations, breaking down each permission and what it touches.
Second rejection: Missing privacy policy URL.
I spun up a simple site (GitHub Pages works well) with a proper, written-out privacy policy and linked it in the listing.
Third rejection: Screenshots showing browser UI.
I retook the screenshots using DevTools and cropping so only the content area and extension UI were visible, in the exact required resolutions.

The fourth submission finally went through. Review time: about 18 hours.

The Bottom Line

Publishing a Chrome extension isn’t just about writing code.

It’s about:

Navigating Google’s policies
Being extremely clear about permissions
Writing a decent privacy policy
Presenting your extension like a real product

If you’re building something simple with minimal permissions, you’ll probably sail through without much drama.

If you’re building a powerful debugging or automation tool that needs broad access, expect a few rejections. Treat each one as feedback on how to be more precise and transparent.

And if you decide it’s not worth jumping through all the hoops for a public listing, the trusted tester or private route is always there. Some of the best tools live quietly inside a small team and never see the public store at all.

Either way, zip that folder and start the journey. Collect a few rejections. Tune the wording. Iterate.

You’ll get there.