Orphex Merchant Feed Health Check
A destination-aware feed repair queue with actual diagnostic evidence, matched-source checks, and bounded eligibility conclusions.
When to use
When Merchant Center eligibility or feed-versus-site consistency needs a scoped repair queue.
Bring the right data
Use your own export, or start with the template. The fictional example shows the expected shape.
View the input columns
item_idRequired- Stable merchant item identity within target country/language/destination
destinationRequired- Reported eligibility destination
statusRequired- Actual destination-specific eligibility status
issue_codeRequired- Supplied diagnostic issue identifier or none
feed_priceRequired- Submitted customer price in supplied currency
landing_priceRequired- Observed equivalent landing/checkout price at same time
currencyRequired- ISO currency
feed_availabilityRequired- Submitted stock/preorder state
landing_availabilityRequired- Observed equivalent landing/checkout availability
observed_spendOptional- Matched historical spend; not future lost revenue
Add your business context
Supply your objectives, conversion definitions, currency, constraints, and approved brand facts once, then reuse the profile across reviews. Leave unknown values explicit.
See an example
Fictional data · an illustrative review, not a customer result.
Prioritize feed repairs and distinguish diagnostics from revenue claims.
View the example result
Fictional example output
| Item/destination | Finding | Next verification |
|---|---|---|
| sku-a / Shopping ads | Reported disapproval plus observed $90 feed / $100 landing price mismatch | Reconcile source-of-truth price and destination/crawl timestamp; correct the authorized feed source, then recheck diagnostics |
| sku-b / Shopping ads | Status says eligible, but supplied stock observations conflict | Verify stock freshness, variant and checkout consistency; eligibility may lag current data |
| sku-c / free listings | No supplied mismatch or diagnostic issue | Preserve this scoped observation; it does not certify all attributes/destinations |
One of three supplied item-destination rows is disapproved (33.33%). One of two Shopping-ad rows is disapproved (50.00%); free listings must not be silently counted as ad eligibility. Historical spend for sku-a is $400 exposure, not lost sales or recoverable revenue. No merchant-wide health guarantee, appeal, product exclusion, or price change was made.
Before you start
Review the required context
- Supplied data with the documented task-specific columns, stable scope, and refresh/maturity context
- Business definitions and constraints relevant to the decision; see the reusable business-context reference
The method
Establish product identity and freshness
Record merchant scope, target country/language, destination, stable item/variant ID, feed source/update, diagnostic/crawl timestamp, and site/checkout observation time. An item can have different status across destinations; keep unique item-destination rows and their denominators explicit. Do not call a partial export a complete catalog audit. Preserve account-level versus item-level issues and statuses exactly as supplied.
View SKILL.md
Orphex Merchant Feed Health Check
Review the supplied Merchant Center product data, destination-specific issues and matching website/checkout evidence. Eligibility issues and economic performance are different analyses.
Establish product identity and freshness
Record merchant scope, target country/language, destination, stable item/variant ID, feed source/update, diagnostic/crawl timestamp, and site/checkout observation time. An item can have different status across destinations; keep unique item-destination rows and their denominators explicit. Do not call a partial export a complete catalog audit. Preserve account-level versus item-level issues and statuses exactly as supplied.
Check mismatches in price/currency/tax convention, availability, variant, link, required identifiers and attributes, images, and source precedence only when supporting evidence is present. Conditional identifier/variant/shipping requirements depend on product, country and destination; check current official requirements rather than inventing blanket GTIN, image-size or title rules. Do not invent identifiers or change in-stock/out-of-stock to gain eligibility.
A site observation and an eligible status can conflict because timestamps or definitions differ. Verify the exact variant, checkout and data source before calling a live regression or failed correction. Actual source errors, unsupported observations, and pending verification should be distinct. Do not fetch or modify private merchant data without the requested access scope.
Approval is a recorded destination-specific status, not evidence of actual impressions, clicks, or active delivery. Do not describe an approved item as serving unavailable inventory without matched delivery evidence. Preserve a supplied stock or price mismatch as a repair finding while keeping exposure and business impact unknown when delivery rows are absent.
A common snapshot capture time does not establish when the feed was updated, the site was crawled, or eligibility diagnostics were processed. Do not exclude update, crawl, or processing lag merely because observations were captured together. Request the relevant state timestamps and item/destination identity, and distinguish the confirmed value mismatch from its unresolved synchronization mechanism. Recheck the processed source and diagnostics after repair before claiming closure.
Prioritize a repair queue
Rank actual disapprovals/limited eligibility, scope, business-provided importance, freshness and repair dependencies. Historical spend/revenue may describe exposure when correctly joined; it does not predict lost or recoverable sales. Feed coverage alone cannot explain a ROAS decline or prove incremental demand.
For each issue show item/destination, evidence, source of truth to inspect, proposed repair, owner if supplied, and recheck condition after update/crawl/diagnostics. Correct the upstream source rather than recommending conflicting manual edits blindly. Appeals, feed uploads, item exclusions and price/stock changes require explicit action scope. Finish with coverage limits and untested destinations.
Official references
Portable inputs and examples
- Read the input contract when mapping a new export or checking the example's scope and definitions. Copy the header-only CSV template when preparing data; equivalent supplied exports remain acceptable.
- Read the reusable business context only for business facts or constraints this task needs. Reuse user-supplied facts with their source/date; the template contains no default targets.
- Inspect the complete fictional input with its example output when learning the output and calculation boundaries. Never use fictional values for a real account.
State whether the result is complete, partial, or blocked for the requested decision. Link material findings to actual supplied rows/sources and separate observed metrics, hypotheses, and estimates. Lead with a short business conclusion, then evidence, uncertainty, and the next measurable check. A data export or installed skill does not authorize account changes.
Source:View on GitHub Open SKILL.md