Early American aircraft carrier design and construction had to comply with the Washington Naval Treaty (and then the London Treaty). Carrier designs were also iterative, with each new design providing valuable information for naval architects to learn and improve from earlier designs.

You had Lexington/Saratoga, built on converted battlecruiser hulls, which provided a foundation for large "fleet carrier" designs. The US then sought to make several changes and build a smaller aircraft carrier next, which became the Ranger. As the first purpose-built carrier, Ranger made some improvements but it became clear that it wasn't as capable as Lexington and Saratoga. So the next carriers were Yorktown and Enterprise, funded by an executive order from Franklin Roosevelt in 1933. That put the United States at its limit of 135,000 tons of aircraft carriers prescribed in the 1922 Washington Naval Treaty. Yorktown and Enterprise were clearly the best carriers built yet; they were influential in the design of the Essex-class carriers that came later.

The Washington Naval Treaty also provided limitations on how soon you could retire and replace older vessels, but there was a special provision for aircraft carriers deemed "experimental." It's Article VIII if you want to read for yourself:

...all aircraft carrier tonnage in existence or building on November 12, 1921, shall be considered experimental, and may be replaced, within the total tonnage limit prescribed in Article VII, without regard to its age.

For the United States, that was Langley. So the US could build a new aircraft carrier to replace Langley, but as the navy was at its tonnage limit, couldn't build another full-size carrier. Another carrier of the Yorktown class would have been too big for the treaty limits. I can't seem to find the full text for the 1934 Vinson-Trammell Act and don't feel like sorting through the Library of Congress archives, but this paper, on page 89, includes the snippet of the bill that specifically prescribes the new carrier must only be 15,000 tons to replace Langley. It's also just a good read to understand some of the factors at play in 1930s naval procurement.

While the Wasp was certainly not as capable as the Yorktown class or Essex class, it was an improvement on the Ranger, and did incorporate some technology that would prove useful on later carrier designs. Every new carrier was a learning experience at that point. Wasp's limitations were apparent during the war, but it was at least considered capable enough to operate in the Pacific, unlike Ranger.

I haven't used this for my answer, but here's a great YouTube video that can provide you with some more information about interwar carrier design. I've read up on the treaties but don't feel quite as qualified to discuss some of the engineering and designs of the time.