| name | heuristic-eval |
| description | Run a structured heuristic evaluation against a prototype or feature, severity-rank the issues, and recommend fixes. |
| disable-model-invocation | true |
Run a heuristic evaluation for this scope:
$ARGUMENTS
Use ultrathink. Use the actual prototype, repo, screenshots, routes, components, and docs. Do not give generic advice. Anchor every issue to a real part of the system where possible.
Output
Write docs/hci/heuristic-evaluation.md unless the user asked for another path.
Create the directory if it does not exist.
Heuristics to apply
- Visibility of system status
- Match between system and the real world
- User control and freedom
- Consistency and standards
- Error prevention
- Recognition rather than recall
- Flexibility and efficiency of use
- Aesthetic and minimalist design
- Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors
- Help and documentation
Required output table
| ID | Heuristic | Screen/flow/component | Evidence | Why it matters | Severity (0-4) | Recommendation |
Severity rubric
- 0 = not a problem
- 1 = cosmetic / low priority
- 2 = minor usability issue
- 3 = major usability issue
- 4 = severe / likely to block or mislead users
Required synthesis
End with:
- top 5 highest-severity problems
- quickest wins
- structural issues that need redesign rather than visual tweaks
Note: if a consistency-audit artifact exists for this scope, reference it for heuristic #4 rather than re-auditing consistency in full. Apply heuristic #4 only to findings not already covered.
Deliverable style
- Clear headings
- Markdown tables
- Mermaid diagrams where useful
- Direct language
- No filler