Is a keyword worth targeting just because it describes the app accurately?

Not on its own. Accuracy and demand are different questions: a phrase can describe the app perfectly and still be something almost nobody searches for, or something only a few dominant, well-established apps ever show up for. Checking a seed against real autosuggest data and an estimated popularity and difficulty answers the demand question before any character budget gets spent on it.

Should the same keyword appear in the app name, the subtitle, and the keyword field?

No. Apple's own guidance is not to repeat a word already in the app name, subtitle, or category inside the keyword field. Those are the same fields Apple counts together for search relevance, so repeating a word there spends part of a 100-character budget on a word the field does not need to carry, instead of adding a new one.

Does Google Play have a keyword field like the App Store's?

No. There is no separate, hidden field on Google Play. The app name, short description, and full description are both what a shopper reads and what the store reads for discovery, so keyword research there is about the visible copy itself, not a private field alongside it.

Where do search suggestions for a seed keyword actually come from?

From the store itself. Expanding a seed keyword pulls the same autosuggest data the store already surfaces to anyone typing that seed into its own search box, so the results are real completions, not a guess at what people might type.

Is it possible to find keywords that get searched without a paid tool?

Yes. Typing seed terms directly into a store's search bar and reading its own suggestions costs nothing and uses the same underlying signal a tool does. What a tool like ASO Studio adds is doing that expansion in bulk, attaching a popularity and difficulty score to each result, and reading a listing back to check coverage, rather than replacing the method itself.

For indie app developers

How to find App Store keywords that get searched

To find App Store or Google Play keywords that actually get searched, start from a store's own search suggestions instead of a list of words that merely describe the app.

Research your keywords See pricing

No credit cardFree tier with 200 AI creditsCancel anytime

100

Characters in the keyword field

Listing fields audited

Stores checked for demand

The short answer

Expanding a handful of seed terms through a store's autosuggest data returns phrasing shoppers already type, not a guess at it, and comparing that list against a few direct competitors' titles and descriptions surfaces terms they already rank for that a seed search alone can miss. From there the job shifts from research to placement: the App Store indexes the app name, subtitle, and a 100-character keyword field that no shopper ever sees, while Google Play has no equivalent hidden field and instead reads the visible app name and description text directly, so a word already used in one field does not need to be repeated in another. Forvibe's ASO Studio runs this same sequence inside the product: a seed keyword expands through live store autosuggest data with a popularity and difficulty score attached to each result, and a separate check reads a project's current listing back to show which of its words are actually being indexed. The method holds with or without a tool: search before guessing, then spend a limited field budget on words that do not already sit somewhere else on the listing.

The symptoms of guessing at keywords instead of researching them

A keyword sounds exactly like the app and still returns nothing, because no one who owns a phone actually searches using that exact phrase.

The same core word appears in the app name, the subtitle, and the keyword field on the assumption that repeating it must help, spending part of the keyword field's 100 characters on a word that is already sitting in the name or subtitle.

A competitor shows up first for a search term nobody deliberately targeted, because their title and subtitle happen to combine into that exact phrase and nothing on the losing listing does.

Which fields each store indexes, and why repeating a word wastes it

Apple ranks App Store search results using the app name, subtitle, keywords, and category together, so a word placed in more than one wastes part of the 100-character keyword field. Google Play indexes only its visible listing text.

App Store text relevance: Apple ranks results in part on matches against the app's title, subtitle, keywords, and primary category together.
100-character keyword budget: The App Store keywords field is capped at 100 characters, entered as comma-separated terms with no spaces.
Don't repeat a word: Apple's own guidance says not to repeat a word already in the app name, subtitle, or category inside the keywords field.
No Google Play keyword field: Google Play indexes the visible app name, short description, and full description directly, each with its own character limit.

Read the full explanation

On the App Store, search results are ranked in part on text relevance, meaning matches against the app's title, subtitle, keywords, and primary category, alongside factors like ratings and downloads. The keywords field itself is capped at 100 characters total, entered as comma-separated terms with no spaces between them. Apple's own guidance is direct: don't repeat any words already included in the app name, subtitle, or category. Title, subtitle, keywords, and category are the same four fields already counted together for text relevance, so a word placed in more than one of them is spending two budgets on a single match instead of adding a new one. The app name and subtitle are each capped at 30 characters, so between the three fields a word typed once in the name or subtitle is a word the 100-character keyword field does not need to carry again. Google Play draws the line differently: it has no separate keywords field at all, so the app name, short description, and full description are both what a shopper reads and, by Google's own description, what helps a shopper discover the app in the first place, each with its own character limit. Google's own guidance treats repetitive or irrelevant keyword use inside those visible fields as something to avoid rather than something with a dedicated allowance.

The sequence for confirming demand and deciding where it goes

Treat a candidate list as unproven
Wherever the list came from, brainstorming, a competitor's listing, or the seed-and-autosuggest process the ASO guide walks through, none of it is confirmed demand yet. Relevance and demand are different questions, and only checking a candidate against real search behavior answers the second one.
Confirm demand before spending a character on it
Autosuggest confirms a phrase is something people actually search for. A popularity and difficulty score then shows whether it is worth the fight before any character budget goes to it.
Read the current listing back the way the store does
Audit which words in the current app name, subtitle or short description, and keyword field are actually being picked up as indexed keywords, since a word can sit in the copy and still not register as one.
Give each confirmed word exactly one field
A confirmed candidate earns exactly one field: the app name or subtitle if it needs to read well, the keyword field if it doesn't. Repeating it elsewhere adds nothing, so the decision that matters is where it goes, not how many fields it occupies.
Or let Forvibe run the decision inside the workspace
ASO Studio's Research tab scores any candidate for popularity and difficulty, flags which tracked keywords a competitor already outranks, and reads the current listing back to show which words are actually indexed.

Field character limits by store

Store	Field	Character limit
App Store	App name	30 characters
App Store	Subtitle	30 characters
App Store	Keywords field	100 characters
Google Play	App name	30 characters
Google Play	Short description	80 characters
Google Play	Full description	4,000 characters