Studio Assistant: Add "Open in Studio" button to Blueprint output

[gcsecsey]

Related issues

• Fixes STU-995

Proposed Changes

• Add a utility to detect if the generated JSON is a Blueprint
• Show an "Open in Studio" button for Blueprints
• Redirect to the deeplink with the Blueprint content when the button is clicked

Testing Instructions

• Open Studio and go to the Assistant tab on one of the sites

• Prompt it to generate a Blueprint to be used for a new site

• Try prompting for both simpler and more complicated setups, to test the Blueprint parsing at the later step:

  • Installing one plugin:

    Help me start a site using Blueprints that installs WooCommerce
    

  • Installing a plugin, a theme, and executing some code:

    Help me start a site using Blueprints that:
     - Installs WooCommerce
     - Installs the Twenty Twenty-Three theme from WP.org
     - Adds 5 example products to WooCommerce
    

Note

The Assistant can potentially generate invalid blueprints, where the plugins array is not flat, or the theme install step is invalid. It can take a couple of tries or re-prompts to get a semantically correct Blueprint generated.

• Scroll down to the bottom of the generated JSON
• Check that there is a new "Open in Studio" button rendered, and click it
• Check that you're dropped in the "Add a site" step with the blueprint loaded
• Check that the site creation proceeds without errors

trunk	this branch

Opening the Blueprint:
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/e36ae1c6-8614-4e40-b788-d56228f1501a

Pre-merge Checklist

• Have you checked for TypeScript, React or other console errors?

[gcsecsey]

This can be reverted after #2103 is merged.

[github-actions]

📊 Performance Test Results

Comparing 55a3fe7 vs trunk

site-editor

Metric	trunk	55a3fe7	Diff	Change
load	12654.00 ms	13542.00 ms	+888.00 ms	🔴 7.0%

site-startup

Metric	trunk	55a3fe7	Diff	Change
siteCreation	25314.00 ms	22525.00 ms	-2789.00 ms	🟢 -11.0%
siteStartup	11074.00 ms	11025.00 ms	-49.00 ms	🟢 -0.4%

---

Results are median values from multiple test runs.

Legend: 🟢 Improvement (faster) | 🔴 Regression (slower) | ⚪ No change

[nightnei]

LGTM and works as expected 👍
However, it seems that blogname was ignored, but it's definitelly not connected to this PR.

[gavande1]

I have tested this and it works great. It took couple of retries to get the correct blueprint. Maybe we could open another issue to refine blueprint generation. But that's not related to this issue. This works well when valid blueprint is generated. LGTM 👍

[bcotrim]

Thanks for adding the suggestion @gcsecsey
This looks great 👍

[gcsecsey]

I have tested this and it works great. It took couple of retries to get the correct blueprint. Maybe we could open another issue to refine blueprint generation. But that's not related to this issue. This works well when valid blueprint is generated. LGTM 👍

That's a good point, thanks @gavande1. I added STU-1053 to track this.

[gavande1]

That's a good point, thanks @gavande1. I added STU-1053 to track this.

Lovely. Thanks!