plan-design-review
Skill1.7k starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Design review of plans before implementation. Rate each design dimension 0-10, explain what a 10 looks like, then edit the plan to get there. AI Slop detection. Use when reviewing UI/UX plans or design decisions.
49 other projects use a version of this.
Trending
Quiet since February.thin dataabout the whole repository
Most recently taken up by
- podo/design-agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- timurgaleev/vibestacktheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- 0xUrsanomics/utopia-ostheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- trungtm78/ClaudeSkillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- davidanthonyn/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- thedigitalorganizer/soloshiptheir own version, first seen Oct 15, 2026
Who's talking about DenchHQ/ironclaw
The biggest 1 of 1 mention linking to the repository that our crawl found. Each line is their own headline.
Used with
Projects with it also use plan-tune, ios-clean and 9 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
ShreyRaviSkillplan-tune
Self-tuning question sensitivity + developer psychographic for gstack (v1: observational). Review which AskUserQuestion prompts fire across gstack skills, set per-question preferences (never-ask / always-ask / ask-only-for-one-way), inspect the dual-track profile (what you declared vs what your behavior suggests), and enable/disable question tuning. Conversational interface — no CLI syntax required.
Also in 9 projects that use this
Saqlain-811Skillios-clean
Remove the DebugBridge SPM package and all #if DEBUG wiring from an iOS app. (gstack)
Also in 5 projects that use this
Saqlain-811Skillios-fix
Autonomous iOS bug fixer. (gstack)
Also in 5 projects that use this
ShreyRaviSkilllanding-report
Read-only queue dashboard for workspace-aware ship. Shows which VERSION slots are currently claimed by open PRs, which sibling Conductor workspaces have WIP work likely to ship soon, and what slot /ship would pick next. No mutations — just a snapshot. Use when asked to "landing report", "what's in the queue", "show me open PRs", or "which version do I claim next". (gstack)
Also in 8 projects that use this
seek888Skillplan-devex-review
Interactive developer experience plan review. Explores developer personas, benchmarks against competitors, designs magical moments, and traces friction points before scoring. Three modes: DX EXPANSION (competitive advantage), DX POLISH (bulletproof every touchpoint), DX TRIAGE (critical gaps only). Use when asked to "DX review", "developer experience audit", "devex review", or "API design review". Proactively suggest when the user has a plan for developer-facing products (APIs, CLIs, SDKs, libraries, platforms, docs). (gstack) Voice triggers (speech-to-text aliases): "dx review", "developer experience review", "devex review", "devex audit", "API design review", "onboarding review".
Also in 14 projects that use this
timurgaleevSkilldocument-generate
Generate missing docs for a feature, module or project as tutorials, how-tos, reference and explanation.
Also in 7 projects that use this
- +1 more from Saqlain-811
- +2 more from ShreyRavi
Other versions49 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- DenchHQ/DenchClaw★ 1.7k100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 48
- garrytan/gstack★ 141ksame name
- mr-daedalium/ostack-saas★ 108same name
- no-session/pstack★ 96same name
- lucas-flatwhite/gstack-ko★ 45same name
- AICreator-Wind/gstack-openclaw-skills★ 44same name
- WillNigri/Agentic-Tool-Optimization★ 34same name
- podo/design-agent-skills★ 32same name
- CarbeneAI/Forge★ 9same name
- borkweb/skills★ 8same name
- Samin12/skills★ 8same name
38 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository35 other files it gives its agents.
- .cursor/rules/git-rules.mdcCursor rule
- agent-builderSkill
- data-builderSkill
- game-builderSkill
- platform-apiSkill
- app-builderSkill
- composio-appsSkill
- actionsSkill
- documentsSkill
- duckdb-operationsSkill
- object-builderSkill
- reportsSkill
- database-crm-systemSkill
- views-filtersSkill
- dench-integrationsSkill
- benchmarkSkill
- canarySkill
- carefulSkill
- design-consultationSkill
- design-reviewSkill
- document-releaseSkill
- freezeSkill
- guardSkill
- investigateSkill
- land-and-deploySkill
- office-hoursSkill
- plan-ceo-reviewSkill
- plan-eng-reviewSkill
- qa-onlySkill
- qaSkill
- retroSkill
- reviewSkill
- shipSkill
- gstack-workflowSkill
- unfreezeSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 37 edited versions we read keep these.
1
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 19
Before reviewing, check for AI design slop — patterns that emerge when AI generates UI without human taste:
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 37 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Design Plan Review — Rate, Explain, Elevate
You are a senior designer reviewing this plan. Rate every design dimension, explain what perfection looks like, then help get there.
Related skills: plan-ceo-review | design-consultation | design-review
AI Slop Detection
Before reviewing, check for AI design slop — patterns that emerge when AI generates UI without human taste:
- Gratuitous gradients — Gradients on everything for no reason
- Card soup — Everything is a card with rounded corners
- Icon overload — Icons on every element, many meaningless
- Buzzword copy — "Seamlessly integrate", "leverage cutting-edge", "empower your workflow"
- Feature-list layout — 3-column grids of features with icons, no hierarchy
- Drop shadow everywhere — Every element floats above every other element
- Inconsistent spacing — AI doesn't maintain a spacing scale
Flag these specifically and recommend alternatives.
Design Dimensions
Rate each dimension 0-10. For anything below 8, explain concretely what a 10 looks like and propose specific changes. Ask the user for input on each design choice.
1. Information Architecture (0-10)
- Is the content hierarchy correct? What does the user see first, second, third?
- Are there unnecessary levels of nesting?
- Can the user find what they need without thinking?
2. Interaction Design (0-10)
- Are interactions predictable? Does the UI respond to every user action?
- Are empty states designed? Loading states? Error states?
- Edge cases: what happens with 0 items? 1 item? 10,000 items? Very long text?
3. Visual Hierarchy (0-10)
- Does the layout guide the eye to the most important elements?
- Is there enough contrast between primary and secondary content?
- Does the typography scale work? (Heading sizes, body text, captions)
4. Consistency (0-10)
- Are patterns reused? Or does every screen invent its own layout?
- Are button styles consistent? Form styles? Spacing?
- Does it follow the existing design system (if one exists)?
5. Accessibility (0-10)
- Color contrast ratios (WCAG AA minimum)
- Keyboard navigation for all interactive elements
- Screen reader support (proper ARIA labels, semantic HTML)
- Focus indicators visible
6. Responsiveness (0-10)
- Does it work at 375px (mobile)? 768px (tablet)? 1440px (desktop)?
- Are touch targets at least 44px?
- Does content reflow gracefully?
7. Performance (0-10)
- Are images optimized? Using appropriate formats?
- Is the layout shift minimal? (CLS)
- Does it feel instant? (LCP < 2.5s)
8. Delight (0-10)
- Is there anything that makes the user smile?
- Are transitions smooth and purposeful (not decorative)?
- Does it feel crafted or generated?
Output
DESIGN REVIEW SCORECARD
═══════════════════════════════════════
Information Architecture: X/10 [brief note]
Interaction Design: X/10 [brief note]
Visual Hierarchy: X/10 [brief note]
Consistency: X/10 [brief note]
Accessibility: X/10 [brief note]
Responsiveness: X/10 [brief note]
Performance: X/10 [brief note]
Delight: X/10 [brief note]
───────────────────────────────────────
Overall: X/10
AI Slop Score: X/10 (10 = no slop)
═══════════════════════════════════════For implementation, hand off to design-review (applies fixes to code) or design-consultation (builds a full design system).
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

