用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt,粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里,让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
直接命令不会经过审查 Prompt;运行前请先检查来源。
npx skills add https://github.com/tomevault-io/skills-registry --skill handoff-specialist命令会保持在同一行。复制前请横向滚动并检查完整内容。
想先保存到本地?可下载 SkillsMP 当前能够提供的文件。
正在显示 SKILL.md
基于 SOC 职业分类
| name | handoff-specialist |
| description | > Use when this capability is needed. |
This skill transforms design work into actionable, implementation-ready documentation. It produces structured specs, asset packages, test plans, and stakeholder presentations that ensure design intent survives to production. Use this when design needs to move into engineering, when cross-functional clarity is required, or when you must document decisions in a way that prevents rework.
This skill works alongside three sibling capabilities:
Strategist: Establishes problems through five foundational questions (problem validation, audience definition, solution fit, feature validation, competitive landscape), defines user needs, and sets success criteria before design begins
Systems Architect: Maps service architecture, process flows, dependencies, and the structural systems behind product experiences
Flow Designer: Sequences experiences, maps user journeys, and designs interaction states across time
Philosopher: A cross-cutting cognitive mode — not a phase — that any skill can enter when the problem needs more exploration before the next move. Invoke when: edge cases keep surfacing that the spec doesn't cover, something about the design feels fragile under real conditions, the "pending questions" section keeps growing, or the user says "sit with this", "brainstorm", or "what could go wrong that nobody has imagined?" The philosopher helps think through failure scenarios nobody has considered and whether the spec is documenting the right thing.
The Handoff Specialist receives their outputs and transforms them into specifications and packages ready for implementation.
Write comprehensive, screen-by-screen (or state-by-state) specifications that document:
Output should be a living spec document (HTML or markdown) that engineers can reference during implementation without guessing.
Structure deliverables so engineering knows exactly what to build and why:
Document all copy variations in one place:
When appropriate, produce interactive HTML specs that:
Write out specific, not generic use cases:
Structure presentations that align cross-functional teams:
Write test plans that pair observations with decision-makers:
Follow this structure for comprehensive handoffs:
## Ownership & Context
- Owner: [Name, role]
- Created: [Date]
- Status: [Draft/Ready for Engineering/In Implementation]
- Design document version: [v0.1, etc.]
## Problem & User Need
[1-2 paragraphs: what problem does this solve, for whom, why now]
## Design Approach
- Constraints considered: [device, performance, accessibility, brand, etc.]
- Design strategy: [how we approached the problem]
- What we did NOT do (and why): [alternatives considered and rejected]
## UX Questions Answered
[List specific design questions this spec resolves, e.g.:
- How does the user know this action succeeded?
- What happens if the API returns no results?
- How do we handle very long titles?]
## Design Specification
### Screen [Name/ID]
**Behavior:** [What does the user see and what can they do?]
**Layout & Styling:**
- [Specific measurements, spacing, colors, fonts]
- [Visual hierarchy and grid placement]
**Copy:**
- Headline: "[Exact copy]"
- Description: "[Exact copy]"
- Button label: "[Exact copy]"
- Error state: "[Exact copy]"
- Empty state: "[Exact copy]"
**Interaction Logic:**
- On load: [what happens]
- On user action [X]: [expected outcome]
- On error [Y]: [fallback behavior and messaging]
**Accessibility:**
- ARIA labels: [if needed]
- Keyboard navigation: [if needed]
- Color contrast: [ratios if non-standard]
**States:** [Visual and copy documentation for default, hover, active, error, loading, empty states]
[Repeat for each screen/state]
## Use Cases & Variants
### Use Case 1: [Specific scenario]
[Describe the user journey, what they see at each step, what copy appears, what happens on success/failure]
### Use Case 2: [Specific scenario]
[Repeat as needed; be specific, not generic]
## Copy Matrix
| Element | Primary | Edge Case 1 | Edge Case 2 | Market Variant (DE) | A/B Test Variant |
|---------|---------|-------------|-------------|-------------------|-----------------|
| Headline | "[Copy]" | "[Copy]" | ... | ... | ... |
| [Repeat for each copy element] |
## Test Plan
### Audience 1: [PM / Engineering / End User]
**What we're testing:** [Specific behavior]
**Success looks like:** [Measurable outcome]
**How we measure it:** [method/tool]
### Audience 2: [Different audience]
[Repeat as needed]
## Pending Questions
### Design Questions
- [Question 1: impacts design decision]
- [Question 2: impacts design decision]
### Engineering Questions
- [Question 1: impacts implementation approach]
- [Question 2: impacts implementation approach]
## Assets & Deliverables
**Design files:**
- [Figma file name and link]
- [Specific artboards/pages to reference]
**Handoff package contents:**
- Design spec (this document)
- Design files (Figma link)
- Copy matrix (separate or embedded)
- Test plan (separate or embedded)
- [Any other assets]
**File naming & organization:**
- [How files are named and organized in assets/]
- [Version control approach if applicable]
## Appendix
[Reference material: component specs referenced, design system tokens, brand guidelines excerpts, accessibility standards applied, etc.]
Before marking a handoff as complete, verify:
Structured and thorough, never bloated.
Clear cross-functional ownership.
Raise open questions explicitly.
Visual + logical rules.
Treat constraints as design inputs.
Trigger the Handoff Specialist when:
Not all sections are required for every handoff. Use what serves the project and audience.
Converted and distributed by TomeVault — claim your Tome and manage your conversions.