wordpress-creator
Route WordPress build and audit requests to the right implementation path for a Studio-backed site. Use when the user wants WordPress work and it is not yet clear whether the task should be handled as site creation, theme work, a custom block, a plugin, or an audit.
65
77%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/codex/plugins/wordpress-studio/skills/wordpress-creator/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
89%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a well-structured routing skill description that clearly defines its role as a triage point for ambiguous WordPress requests. It excels at completeness and distinctiveness by explicitly stating when it should be used (ambiguous WordPress tasks) and differentiating itself from the more specific downstream skills. The main weakness is that the core action ('route requests') is somewhat abstract compared to skills that list concrete operations.
Suggestions
Consider adding 1-2 more concrete examples of what 'routing' looks like in practice, e.g., 'Asks clarifying questions and delegates to the appropriate WordPress sub-skill based on the user's intent.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names the domain (WordPress) and lists several action categories (site creation, theme work, custom block, plugin, audit), but the primary action is 'routing' rather than performing concrete tasks. The listed categories are more like destinations than specific actions. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (routes WordPress build and audit requests to the right implementation path) and 'when' (when the user wants WordPress work and it's not yet clear which specific task type applies). The explicit 'Use when' clause with a clear trigger condition is well-formed. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'WordPress', 'build', 'audit', 'site creation', 'theme', 'custom block', 'plugin', and 'Studio-backed site'. These cover a good range of terms a user might naturally use when requesting WordPress work. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description carves out a clear niche as a routing/triage skill specifically for ambiguous WordPress requests on Studio-backed sites. It explicitly delineates itself from the downstream skills (site creation, theme work, blocks, plugins, audits), reducing conflict risk with those more specific skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
64%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured routing skill that is concise and clearly defines ownership boundaries and guardrails. Its main weaknesses are the lack of worked examples for ambiguous routing decisions and the absence of explicit links to the specialist skills it references. Adding a brief decision example and concrete file references would significantly improve actionability and progressive disclosure.
Suggestions
Add 1-2 worked examples showing ambiguous requests and how the routing decision is made (e.g., 'User asks for a contact form → block-creator if it's a simple form block, plugin-creator if it needs backend email handling').
Add explicit file path references to the specialist skills (e.g., 'See [site-creator/SKILL.md](site-creator/SKILL.md)') so navigation is unambiguous.
Add an explicit step for handling ambiguity: 'If the request could fit multiple paths, ask the user a clarifying question before routing' with example clarifying questions.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient. Every section serves a clear purpose—ownership, routing rules, guardrails—with no unnecessary explanation of what WordPress is or how plugins work. It respects Claude's intelligence throughout. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The routing rules are concrete and specific, providing clear criteria for each path. However, the skill is purely instructional with no examples of ambiguous requests and how they'd be resolved, and the specialist skill names are referenced but not linked or shown in action. It describes routing logic well but lacks worked examples that would make edge cases unambiguous. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The workflow is implicitly: assess request → match routing rule → hand off to specialist. However, there's no explicit sequence or decision tree, no guidance on what to do when the user's intent is ambiguous (e.g., ask clarifying questions), and no validation checkpoint before handoff. For a routing/decision skill, a clearer decision flowchart or explicit 'if unclear, ask X' step would improve clarity. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill references five specialist skills by name (site-creator, theme-creator, etc.) which implies a well-structured bundle, but no bundle files are provided and there are no explicit links or file paths to these specialist skills. The content itself is well-organized with clear sections, but the navigation to downstream skills is only implied, not clearly signaled with paths or links. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- Automattic/build-with-wordpress
- Commit
1c076c2
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.