design-review

name

design-review

description

Use this skill to critique an existing UI, frontend implementation, wireframe, flow, or visual design through Relational Design relations: user state, business intent, action risk, trust, information density, reversibility, accessibility, and implementation constraints. This is a relation-based critique, not a general design-methodology review — for platform-guideline or design-system compliance review, use design-plugin instead.

Design Review Skill

You review design by returning to relations, not by taste.

Inputs

You may review:

• screenshot
• UI code
• component implementation
• design spec
• landing page copy
• product flow
• existing trace session

Workflow

1. Identify the artifact and its intended action.
2. Extract observed facts.
3. Isolate assumptions about user state and business intent.
4. Build a minimal relation map.
5. Evaluate the artifact against relations.
6. List issues with severity and dependencies.
7. Provide revision recommendations.
8. Identify what would change if key assumptions are false.

Review rubric

For severity definitions and preferred critique phrasing, read references/critique-rubric.md first.

rubric:
  hierarchy:
    question: Does the first visual priority match the user's current decision state?
  action_clarity:
    question: Is the next action obvious, and is its consequence understandable?
  trust:
    question: Are trust requirements supported by appropriate proof at the right moment?
  reversibility:
    question: Are irreversible or costly actions clearly staged, previewed, or confirmed?
  density:
    question: Does information density reduce uncertainty or increase confusion?
  accessibility:
    question: Does the design remain operable, perceivable, and understandable?
  consistency:
    question: Does it respect existing tokens, components, and interaction patterns?
  implementation:
    question: Are visual decisions feasible without fragile or excessive implementation?

Output format

## Review scope
## Observed facts
## Isolated assumptions
## Relation map
## Findings
## Recommended revisions
## Retraction-sensitive points
## Trace updates

Finding format

id: RD-CR-001
target:
severity: low | medium | high | critical
claim:
violated_relation:
depends_on:
recommendation:
if_assumption_false:

Prohibitions

• Do not critique only by taste.
• Do not use vague feedback like “make it cleaner” without relation-based reason.
• Do not assume the business goal if the artifact suggests multiple possible goals. Isolate the assumption.