Real tools, built to solve real problems

You build on your own machine, it works perfectly, you hand it over — and it fills the client's screen with errors, because their host runs an older PHP than yours. WordPress's own Site Health only inspects a single environment; PHP compatibility checkers only lint code in isolation. Neither answers the question that actually matters before you deploy.

Two tools that normally live apart — Site Health inspects one environment, PHP-compat linters check code in isolation — fused into one go/no-go answer. The scanner is a from-scratch, dependency-free tokenizer so it runs on any host, and it escalates automatically to PHP_CodeSniffer with the PHPCompatibility standard when a host can support it.

You're sitting on years of genuinely good posts buried on page 14 of the archive, invisible to new readers and long abandoned by search crawlers. The common 'fix' is to fake publish dates so old posts look new — which does nothing for Google and can backfire. The honest play is to resurface what's still worth reading and be straight about when it changed.

Built honesty-first: it refuses the date-faking dark pattern by default, disables re-floating automatically on date-based permalinks so it can never break your URLs, and keeps the AI strictly advisory behind your own key. Every automated pass is logged, so you can go back and do a real content pass on the ones worth it.

Every backup plugin makes a backup. Almost none of them ever check that the backup actually restores — you find that out on the worst possible day, when the zip is corrupt or the database dump won't import. 'I have a backup' and 'I have a backup I've proven restores' are completely different things.

The whole design is about making the undo real: it test-restores databases and integrity-checks archives rather than trusting them, is honest about which strength of 'verified' applies to each point, and ships a ZipArchive / PclZip archive layer so it runs even on hosts without the PHP zip extension.

Plenty of shops charge custom-build prices for a lightly-reskinned template, and most business owners have no way to tell the difference. There was no quick, honest way to ask 'is this site actually custom, and is it any good under the hood?' without hiring someone to audit it.

A small PHP endpoint on the same host as the site — no separate server to babysit. It fetches and fingerprints the page, captures a screenshot with headless Chrome, and hands both to Claude for an honest visual and structural assessment. It degrades gracefully: with no screenshot capability it simply runs screenshot-free rather than faking visual scores.