| name | bm.voice-of-user |
| description | Challenge product/spec/feature from user perspective: play different personas walking through flows, list friction points, give improvement suggestions in user language (not technical jargon). Use when designing or reviewing a product, feature, spec, UI, UX, flow, copy, 产品, 设计, 评审, 用户体验, UX, 易用性, 流程, 文案, review feature, design review, user perspective. Fills the 'user perspective' gap. |
| source | opencrew |
| version | 20260530.01 |
Skill: Voice of User (User Perspective Review)
Stand on the user's side to scrutinize products/features/specs/copy/flows. This is not a technical review — it's about putting yourself in the shoes of a "real user" to discover problems and give feedback.
Applicable Scenarios
- Reviewing a feature design / spec / PRD
- Reviewing UI / flows / copy
- Deciding whether to add a feature (first check from user perspective if it's worth it)
- Improving an existing product's experience
- Checking if product intro / Landing Page can resonate with users
Not applicable: Technical quality review (use bm.review-checklist), bug troubleshooting (use bm.systematic-troubleshooting).
Core Principles
- Not the designer's perspective, but the user's. Designers know the context and the "why"; users don't know and don't care.
- User language: Don't say "trade-off", "P0", "MVP"; say "good enough", "hassle-free", "annoying".
- Specific scenarios: Don't say "the experience here is bad"; say "as a first-time user, when I see X, I think Y".
- Truly blocking issues vs. nice-to-haves: Rank them; don't lump everything together.
Workflow
Step 1: Clarify the Review Target
Read the spec / look at screenshots / listen to user's verbal description. If information is incomplete, ask:
- Who is this for? (Most critical)
- In what context will users encounter this? (mobile/desktop, busy/idle, new user/veteran)
- What user problem does it solve?
Step 2: Select Personas (At Least 3)
Don't review with only one "ideal user". Run at least 3 personas:
| Persona | Characteristics | Focus |
|---|
| Novice / First Time | Doesn't know what this is or how to use it | Can they understand at first glance; will they bounce in the first 60 seconds |
| Impatient / Busy | No time to read instructions, wants to finish quickly | How many steps to complete; are there unnecessary steps |
| Power User / Veteran | Familiar with similar products, has comparisons | Is high-frequency operation fast; are there shortcuts |
| Non-technical Person | Elderly, non-tech professions | Can they understand the terminology; can they recover from errors |
| Accessibility User | Visually impaired, motor impaired, keyboard-only users | Can they complete the flow with keyboard; is color contrast sufficient |
If the task background includes specific target user personas, add them or substitute.
Step 3: Walk Through the Flow for Each Persona
Describe from the user's perspective: "I am XXX, I open X, I see Y, I want Z, I do W, the result is..."
Record:
- See: Interface/text/buttons
- Think: Inner questions, expectations, misunderstandings
- Do: Actions
- Result: Whether it matches expectations; if not, where they got stuck
Focus on catching:
- Which step is most likely to cause abandonment / exit
- Which phrase/term confuses the user
- Which button makes the user unsure whether to click it
- How many steps to complete the core purpose (more = worse)
Step 4: List Friction Points + Rank Them
## Friction Points (By Severity)
### 🔴 Blocking (User Will Abandon)
- **Novice landing on homepage for the first time**: Sees "configure vault path" and doesn't know what it means, might just close the app
- Suggested copy: "Tell me which folder your notes are in" + a "Let me choose" button
### 🟡 Annoying (Can Complete But Frustrating)
- **Power user**: Need to click 4 times every time to add a task, can we make it one click?
- Suggestion: Add `Cmd+N` keyboard shortcut
### 🟢 Nice to Have
- Colors could be more harmonious
Step 5: Suggestions Must Include Alternatives
Don't just say "this doesn't work"; provide at least one specific alternative:
❌ "This button copy is bad"
✅ "Change 'Confirm Submit' to 'Send It Like This' — more conversational, easier for novices to click"
❌ "The flow is too long"
✅ "Merge steps 2 and 3 into one form, from 5 steps → 3 steps"
Classic Follow-up Question Checklist
Ask yourself each time (not all need to be used):
Entry / First Impression
- How does the user know this feature exists?
- Can they understand what it does at first glance?
- Can they articulate the value within 30 seconds?
Task Path
- How many steps to complete the core goal?
- Are there unnecessary intermediate steps?
- Which steps require user input? How much mental effort does the input take?
Error Tolerance
- Can the user go back if they make a mistake?
- Can the user understand error messages?
- Are there confirmations for destructive/irreversible actions?
Waiting / Feedback
- Is there a progress indicator for slow operations?
- Is there clear feedback upon completion?
- When it fails, does the user know what to do next?
Leaving / Returning
- Can the user find their previous state when they come back?
- After using it, would they want to recommend it to a friend? Why?
Anti-Patterns
| Anti-Pattern | Why It's Wrong | Correct Approach |
|---|
| Vague "experience is bad" | Not actionable | Specific to "which persona, sees what, thinks what, stuck where" |
| Only criticizing without solutions | Designer can't act on it | At least 1 alternative per issue |
| Using product manager jargon | Users don't think like that | User language |
| Dumping 30 issues at once | No focus, can't fix them all | Rank as blocking/annoying/nice-to-have, fix blocking first |
| Representing users with "I think" | You are not the user | Review per persona explicitly, note which persona's perspective |
| Ending after review | No re-review after changes | Walk through persona flow again after fixes to verify |
Output Template
# Voice of User Review: {Target}
**Review Target**: {spec / feature / screenshot / flow}
**Target Users**: {Personas}
**Core Goal**: {What users want to achieve with this}
## Personas
1. **{P1 Name}**: {One-sentence background}
2. **{P2 Name}**: {One-sentence background}
3. **{P3 Name}**: {One-sentence background}
## Flow Walkthrough
### {P1} Perspective
> I am X, I open Y, I see Z...
- ✅ Smooth parts
- ⚠️ Friction point 1
- ❌ Blocking point
### {P2} Perspective
...
## Friction Points Summary
### 🔴 Blocking
- ... (Suggestion: ...)
### 🟡 Annoying
- ... (Suggestion: ...)
### 🟢 Nice to Have
- ...
## Overall Assessment
**Worth doing?**: {Judgment on core goal}
**Top priority fixes**: {1-3 things}
Collaboration with Other Skills
- Before design: bm.brainstorming has already finalized the spec → run voice-of-user review here
- After changes: Run voice-of-user again → then use bm.verification for self-verification
- Writing product copy / Landing Page: After draft is done, use voice-of-user to check if new users can be engaged within 30 seconds
File Locations
- Intermediate artifacts:
./working/voice-of-user-{topic}.md
- Final artifacts:
./reviews/{topic}-uxreview.md (code project → ./docs/reviews/{topic}-uxreview.md) (when user requests formal review/archiving)
- Directory does not exist: Create it proactively; follow user conventions if they exist
- Always within cwd: Don't write to
/tmp/, ~/Desktop/, ~/Downloads/, or anywhere outside cwd (unless user explicitly specifies)
Code Project Detection: If code project markers exist under cwd (package.json, Cargo.toml, go.mod, pyproject.toml, setup.py, pom.xml, Gemfile, composer.json, or src/ + .git/), final artifacts go under ./docs/ in corresponding subdirectories instead of the project root. Intermediate artifacts in ./working/ remain unchanged. User-specified paths take priority.
