design-critique
$
npx mdskill add mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/design-critiqueThis skill provides structured, actionable design feedback using established UX frameworks. It balances positive observations with clear, prioritised improvement suggestions.
SKILL.md
.github/skills/design-critiqueView on GitHub ↗
--- name: design-critique description: "Give structured, constructive feedback on any design. Use when asked to critique a design, review a UI, give feedback on a Figma file or wireframe, assess a user flow, or evaluate a design against UX principles. Applies Jobs-to-be-Done, Gestalt principles, and usability heuristics to give actionable feedback." --- # Design Critique Skill This skill provides structured, actionable design feedback using established UX frameworks. It balances positive observations with clear, prioritised improvement suggestions. ## Required Inputs Ask the user for these if not provided: - **What is being reviewed** (screen, flow, component, full product) - **Design description or attached image** (describe it if no image — the skill will still work) - **User goal** (what is the user trying to accomplish with this design?) - **Context** (web / mobile / desktop app / physical product) - **Stage** (early wireframe / mid-fidelity / high-fidelity / live product) - **Primary concern** (optional — e.g. "I'm worried the onboarding is too long" or "I think the CTA is unclear") ## Output Structure --- # Design Critique: [Design Name or Screen] **User goal:** [What the user needs to accomplish] **Context:** [Platform / Stage] **Critique focus:** [Primary concern if stated, otherwise "full review"] --- ## 1. What's Working [3–5 specific, honest observations about what the design does well. Don't manufacture praise — only include genuine strengths. Be specific: "The visual hierarchy clearly guides the eye from headline → supporting detail → CTA" is useful. "Looks clean" is not.] --- ## 2. Priority Issues Rank issues by impact on the user goal. Use: - 🔴 **High** — Blocks or significantly degrades the user's ability to complete their goal - 🟡 **Medium** — Causes friction or confusion but doesn't block completion - 🟢 **Low** — Polish or preference — nice to fix but not critical For each issue: ### [Priority] Issue [N]: [Short name] **What's happening:** [Describe the specific design problem — be precise about which element, screen, or interaction] **Why it matters:** [Connect to the user goal or a specific principle — don't just say "it's confusing." Say why it creates confusion and what the consequence is for the user.] **Framework reference:** [Name the principle being violated — e.g. Nielsen's Heuristic #6 (Recognition over Recall), Gestalt proximity, JTBD clarity, Fitts's Law, etc.] **Recommendation:** [Specific, actionable suggestion. Not "make the button bigger" but "Increase the primary CTA to at least 44x44px to meet touch target guidelines; consider moving it below the form rather than inline with the input fields to reduce accidental taps."] --- ## 3. Heuristic Assessment Quick assessment against Nielsen's 10 Usability Heuristics — score each as ✅ Pass / 🟡 Partial / ❌ Fail: | Heuristic | Status | Note | |---|---|---| | 1. Visibility of system status | | | | 2. Match between system and real world | | | | 3. User control and freedom | | | | 4. Consistency and standards | | | | 5. Error prevention | | | | 6. Recognition rather than recall | | | | 7. Flexibility and efficiency of use | | | | 8. Aesthetic and minimalist design | | | | 9. Help users recognise, diagnose, and recover from errors | | | | 10. Help and documentation | | | Only include heuristics relevant to what's visible in the design — don't penalise for things not in scope. --- ## 4. Gestalt Principles Check [Comment on any Gestalt principles that are either well-applied or violated:] - **Proximity:** [Are related elements grouped clearly?] - **Similarity:** [Do similar elements look similar?] - **Continuity:** [Does the eye flow naturally through the design?] - **Figure/Ground:** [Is the primary content clearly distinguished from background?] - **Closure:** [Are any implied shapes or containers confusing?] --- ## 5. JTBD Alignment [Assess how well the design serves the stated job-to-be-done:] - **Does the design make the user's primary job obvious?** [Yes / Partially / No — explain] - **Are there any elements that distract from the primary job?** [List any competing CTAs, distractions, or unclear hierarchy] - **What emotional job does this design serve?** [Speed / Confidence / Control / Delight / Other] — and does the visual design match that emotional goal? --- ## 6. Top 3 Recommended Next Steps Prioritised list of the 3 most impactful changes. Each should be actionable in the next design iteration: 1. [Most impactful change — specific] 2. [Second priority] 3. [Third priority] --- ## Quality Checks - [ ] "What's working" includes only genuine, specific observations - [ ] Every issue has a framework reference (not just subjective opinion) - [ ] Recommendations are specific and actionable - [ ] Priority levels (High/Medium/Low) reflect actual impact on user goal - [ ] Heuristic assessment only covers visible elements ## Example Trigger Phrases - "Critique this design: [description or image]" - "Give me feedback on this UI/UX" - "Review this Figma screen for usability issues" - "What's wrong with this user flow?" - "Do a heuristic evaluation of [screen/product]"
More from mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills
- 360-feedback-templateDesign a 360-degree feedback survey or write a structured 360 feedback report. Use when asked to build a 360 feedback process, write 360 feedback for a colleague, design a feedback survey, or produce a feedback report. Produces either a complete survey instrument with rating scales and open-ended questions, or a structured narrative feedback report with themes, strengths, and development areas.
- ab-test-plannerDesign statistically rigorous A/B tests for product features, UI changes, onboarding flows, and pricing experiments. Use when asked to set up an experiment, design an A/B test, calculate sample size, or interpret test results. Produces a complete test plan with hypothesis, variant definitions, sample size, duration estimate, guardrail metrics, and a results interpretation guide.
- accessibility-auditGenerate a WCAG 2.2 accessibility audit checklist and remediation suggestions for any UI or design. Use when asked to audit for accessibility, check WCAG compliance, review a design for a11y issues, or create an accessibility remediation plan. Produces a prioritised checklist with pass/fail assessments and specific fixes.
- account-planBuild a structured account plan for any key customer or target account. Use when asked to create an account plan, key account strategy, strategic account review, or territory plan. Produces a complete account plan with relationship map, growth opportunities, risks, and 90-day action plan.
- aeo-optimizerOptimize an article for Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) — restructuring content so AI engines like ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Claude can extract, quote, and cite it. Rewrites headings as questions, drops 50-80 word answer capsules, audits paragraph length, and flags trust signals. Use when asked to AEO-optimize, make content AI-readable, improve AI citation chances, or adapt an article for answer engines.
- ai-ethics-reviewConduct an ethical review of an AI or ML feature, model, or product. Use when asked to run an AI ethics review, assess AI risks, audit a model for bias, or produce an AI impact assessment. Produces a structured ethics review covering fairness, transparency, privacy, safety, accountability, and societal impact with prioritised mitigations.
- ai-product-canvasStructure AI and ML product decisions with the rigour of any product decision. Use when building AI-powered features, evaluating LLM integrations, designing AI products, or assessing AI readiness. Produces a complete AI product canvas covering problem definition, model approach, data requirements, evaluation framework, UX design, responsible AI checklist, and launch monitoring plan.
- ambiguity-resolverStructure vague opportunities and unclear briefs into actionable one-page problem statements. Use when asked to clarify a vague brief, frame an undefined problem, make sense of an unclear opportunity, or when the user says 'we need to figure out what to do about X' or 'I've been asked to look into Y'. Produces a structured problem brief with reframed questions, scoped boundaries, and a minimum viable research plan.
- api-docs-writerWrite clear, developer-facing API documentation. Use when asked to document an API endpoint, write API reference docs, create a developer guide, or turn a raw spec/Postman collection into documentation. Produces endpoint documentation with descriptions, parameters, request/response examples, and error codes.
- api-versioning-strategyWrite an API versioning strategy document for a service or API platform. Use when asked to define versioning policy, plan API deprecation, classify breaking changes, or document version lifecycle. Produces a complete versioning strategy with breaking-change classification table, deprecation timeline, migration guide template, and client communication template.