WordPress/ai - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

AI features and experiments for WordPress. Modular framework for testing AI capabilities.

C-Rank Grade: A (Welcoming) - 66/100

External PR Merge Rate: 73%

Response Time: -

First Timer Success: 79%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is WordPress/ai welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

WordPress/ai has a recorded first-timer success rate of 78.9%. Repositories ranked A typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.

How fast can I expect code review feedback on my pull request?

Maintainers in WordPress/ai respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 0.0 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 66.4 C-Rank™ score (A Tier) represent?

The C-Rank™ system evaluates GitHub projects on a 0–100 scale using real data: PR merge rates, review turnaround time, active maintainer presence, and first-time contributor success. A score of 66.4 places WordPress/ai in the A tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for WordPress/ai?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for WordPress/ai is 72.5%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in WordPress/ai?

WordPress/ai currently has 18 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

WordPress
WordPress/aiA•Welcoming363
GitHub
Back to Explorer
WordPress

WordPress/ai

363
InactiveA•Welcoming(66/100)PHP

AI features and experiments for WordPress. Modular framework for testing AI capabilities.

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Welcoming Community Builder

Warmth Score
8.9/10
Patience Score
8.8/10
Nitpick Rate
30%

Highly welcoming maintainers in WordPress/ai. Prompt code reviews with positive guidance for new contributors.

Top PR Submission Do's

  • •Ensure code complies with the project coding style
  • •Keep PRs scoped to a single concern
  • •Include context and link to the related issue

Top PR Friction Pitfalls (Don'ts)

  • •Do not submit PRs without linking an issue
  • •Do not break existing tests without fixing them
  • •Do not mix unrelated refactors in a single PR
Response Velocity
-
No reviewer activity recorded

Average Response Latency

Tracks hours until a maintainer leaves a review, comment, or PR response.

Merge Efficiency
72.5%
Moderate PR acceptance rate

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
78.9%
Strong first-timer PR acceptance rate

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
43 core
Highly collaborative maintainer core
Diagnostic Health HUD
72.5%
Merge Gauge
78.9%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe53/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

Show contributors that your repository actively reviews and merges external pull requests.

GetMerged C-Rank badge for WordPress/ai
[![GetMerged C-Rank](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/api/badge/WordPress/ai)](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/WordPress/ai?utm_source=github&utm_medium=badge)

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

What problem does this address? Now that we have :ALOT: of experiements, the AI Status widget has grown quite tall. What is your proposed solution? Perhaps we: if less than or equal to 5 experiments are enabled list those out if more than 5 experiments are enabled, note "N experiments enabled" note "X experiments not enabled" Why is this important to you? No response I have searched existing issues and this is not a duplicate. Yes

📅 Opened Oct 9, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

What problem does this address? Sites that cover a subject over months or years build up a large body of work on it, but that work is spread across many separate posts. Category and tag archives list those posts newest-first with no context. A reader who lands on one cannot quickly tell how the subject developed, what the key moments were, where to start reading, or even really that the site is particularly knowledgeable on a given topic or even a summary of the topic (besides a breadth of related posts). The same gap affects AI-powered search and answer tools. When someone asks one of these tools to explain a subject, the tool looks for a single, well-organized source that covers it from start to finish. If a site's coverage only exists as scattered posts, these tools often point to another site that has organized the subject better, even when the original site did the reporting. Editors can hand-build overview pages for their most important subjects, but that does not scale, and

📅 Opened Oct 7, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 70/100Contribute

What problem does this address? Learn WordPress now has a comprehensive AI-Powered WordPress course covering how to configure and use the AI plugin, including provider setup, editorial tools, alt text generation, comment moderation, request logging, connector approvals, and the underlying AI building blocks. We should make this resource easier for AI plugin users to discover so that they have an obvious path from installing and configuring the AI plugin to learning how its features work and how they fit into the broader WordPress AI ecosystem. What is your proposed solution? Add a link to the course from the readmes and/or other relevant documentation Add a contextual link from the plugin's Settings > AI screen, such as a "Learn how to use WordPress AI" help link (perhaps shorter copy so it fits in the header?) Consider whether individual settings or features should link directly to relevant course lessons where useful Why is this important to you? No response I have searched exi

📅 Opened Oct 6, 2026💬 4 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

What problem does this address? Expand the Content Verification experiment with additional ways to manually process media through the configured content credentials verification service. Add three additional entry points for verification: Media Library bulk action: Add a "Verify content" bulk action that processes all selected supported media items Individual media action: Add a "Verify content" action link for individual media items, alongside the existing Content Verification / Content Credentials UI WP-CLI: Add a command for verifying media from the command line, with support for processing a specific attachment or multiple attachments These actions should use the same underlying verification process and update the stored verification status/results consistently. What is your proposed solution? Only expose the actions for supported media types Clearly indicate processing, success, failure, and cases where no Content Credentials are found Consider whether previously verified media

📅 Opened Sep 29, 2026💬 1 comment
Quality: 90/100Contribute

I am seeing a range of these kinds of tools https://www.accelerateplugin.com/block-runner/ & https://github.com/Automattic/blocks-engine & https://github.com/Automattic/studio/blob/trunk/apps/cli/ai/tools/validate-blocks.ts & https://github.com/a8cteam51/claude-code-plugins/tree/trunk/plugins/html-to-block-theme solving the same problem: converting HTML to blocks when working with AI. It makes me wonder if we should just centralize a skill like this and keep it up to date from the WordPress project side as I imagine more and more people are going to re-invent the wheel here. Opening this issue for discussion and so folks who have worked on these sorts of problems can collectively chime in to create something shared and great.

📅 Opened Sep 25, 2026💬 11 comments
Quality: 50/100Contribute
Looking for more PHP beginner tasks?Explore PHP GFI

Contributor Community Vibe Feedback

Rate what actually matters after opening a pull request here.

Have you contributed to this repo?

Rate your first-hand PR experience (review speed, maintainer responsiveness, and onboarding ease) to help other contributors.

3 ratings required
Maintainer helpfulness
Review speed
Beginner friendliness

Contributor Compatibility & Review Speed Analysis for WordPress/ai

When evaluating whether to contribute to WordPress/ai, response velocity and maintainer engagement are crucial. GetMerged continuously tracks pull request trajectories, first-comment latency, and code review rounds to help developers avoid submitting pull requests to backlogged repositories.

Currently, maintainers of WordPress/ai acknowledge new external contributions in approximately -. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 72.5% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to WordPress/ai

01

Is WordPress/ai welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

WordPress/ai has a recorded first-timer success rate of 78.9%. Repositories ranked Welcoming typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.

02

How fast can I expect code review feedback on my pull request?

The initial maintainer response time averages ~-. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 66.4 C-Rank™ score represent?

The C-Rank™ index scores repositories on a 0 to 100 scale using an objective formula: external PR merge rates, initial response speed, active maintainer count, and first-time contributor retention. A score of 66.4 places WordPress/ai in the Welcoming tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for WordPress/ai?

The external pull request merge rate is 72.5%. GetMerged isolates non-core community contributions so external developers get an accurate benchmark of PR acceptance probability.

05

Are there beginner Good First Issues open in WordPress/ai?

Yes, WordPress/ai currently has 18 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels. You can inspect these directly from the repository issues tab.

GetMerged C-Rank™ Indexing Standard

All metrics displayed for WordPress/ai are automatically retrieved via the public GitHub API and recalculated daily. Insider pull requests submitted by repository owners or organization members are excluded from merge rate calculations to preserve objective external contributor statistics.