i-critique

name	i-critique
description	Use when the user says: "critique this UI", "design critique", "review this interface", "does this look AI-generated". Evaluate design effectiveness with actionable feedback.
user-invocable	true

MANDATORY PREPARATION

Read ~/.claude/skills/i-frontend-design/SKILL.md for design principles and anti-patterns. Check for design context (design/context.md, .impeccable.md, or design/direction.md) — if found, use it to inform brand-specific judgments. If no context exists, proceed anyway but note: "No design context found — critique uses universal design principles only. Run /i-teach-impeccable to establish brand context." Additionally gather: what the interface is trying to accomplish.

Critiques are read-only diagnostics — they should never be blocked by missing context.

---

Conduct a holistic design critique, evaluating whether the interface actually works—not just technically, but as a designed experience. Think like a design director giving feedback.

Design Critique

Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:

1. AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)

This is the most important check. Does this look like every other AI-generated interface from 2024-2025?

Review the design against all the anti-patterns in ../i-frontend-design/reference/anti-patterns.md — they are the fingerprints of AI-generated work.

The test: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this," would they believe you immediately? If yes, that's the problem.

2. Visual Hierarchy

• Does the eye flow to the most important element first?
• Is there a clear primary action? Can you spot it in 2 seconds?
• Do size, color, and position communicate importance correctly?
• Is there visual competition between elements that should have different weights?

3. Information Architecture

• Is the structure intuitive? Would a new user understand the organization?
• Is related content grouped logically?
• Are there too many choices at once? (cognitive overload)
• Is the navigation clear and predictable?

4. Emotional Resonance

• What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
• Does it match the brand personality?
• Does it feel trustworthy, approachable, premium, playful—whatever it should feel?
• Would the target user feel "this is for me"?

5. Discoverability & Affordance

• Are interactive elements obviously interactive?
• Would a user know what to do without instructions?
• Are hover/focus states providing useful feedback?
• Are there hidden features that should be more visible?

6. Composition & Balance

• Does the layout feel balanced or uncomfortably weighted?
• Is whitespace used intentionally or just leftover?
• Is there visual rhythm in spacing and repetition?
• Does asymmetry feel designed or accidental?

7. Typography as Communication

• Does the type hierarchy clearly signal what to read first, second, third?
• Is body text comfortable to read? (line length, spacing, size)
• Do font choices reinforce the brand/tone?
• Is there enough contrast between heading levels?

8. Color with Purpose

• Is color used to communicate, not just decorate?
• Does the palette feel cohesive?
• Are accent colors drawing attention to the right things?
• Does it work for colorblind users? (not just technically—does meaning still come through?)

9. States & Edge Cases

• Empty states: Do they guide users toward action, or just say "nothing here"?
• Loading states: Do they reduce perceived wait time?
• Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming?
• Success states: Do they confirm and guide next steps?

10. Microcopy & Voice

• Is the writing clear and concise?
• Does it sound like a human (the right human for this brand)?
• Are labels and buttons unambiguous?
• Does error copy help users fix the problem?

Generate Critique Report

Structure your feedback as a design director would:

Anti-Patterns Verdict

Start here. Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells from the anti-patterns reference. Be brutally honest.

Overall Impression

A brief gut reaction—what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.

What's Working

Highlight 2-3 things done well. Be specific about why they work.

Priority Issues

The 3-5 most impactful design problems, ordered by importance:

For each issue:

• What: Name the problem clearly
• Why it matters: How this hurts users or undermines goals
• Fix: What to do about it (be concrete)
• Command: Route to the most relevant modification skill (e.g., color → /i-colorize, layout → /i-arrange, typography → /i-typeset, performance → /i-optimize, responsive → /i-adapt, consistency → /i-normalize). Do not suggest diagnostic skills.

Minor Observations

Quick notes on smaller issues worth addressing.

Questions to Consider

Provocative questions that might unlock better solutions:

• "What if the primary action were more prominent?"
• "Does this need to feel this complex?"
• "What would a confident version of this look like?"

Remember:

• Be direct—vague feedback wastes everyone's time
• Be specific—"the submit button" not "some elements"
• Say what's wrong AND why it matters to users
• Give concrete suggestions, not just "consider exploring..."
• Prioritize ruthlessly—if everything is important, nothing is
• Don't soften criticism—developers need honest feedback to ship great design

Completion

Write the audit report to .claude/audits/critique-YYYY-MM-DD.md (create the .claude/audits/ directory if needed). Then summarize in conversation:

1. Verdict: One-line overall assessment
2. Top findings: The 3-5 most important issues
3. Suggested next step: Which modification skill to run first