agentleFS
SaehwanParkSaehwanPark/agent-skills-archive/skills/end-user-xp-improver/SKILL.md

end-user-xp-improver

Skill1 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use when planning, implementing, or reviewing a user-facing UI, CLI, API, onboarding, error, or documentation change that needs explicit audience, workflow, low-friction defaults, accessibility, and recovery-path decisions.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

8 rules. About 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈7

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Read product documentation, existing interfaces, examples, tests, and support signals to identify the target users and their job to be done.

    line 12
  2. Distinctive:

    Verify the revised path with representative success, invalid input, empty state, permission failure, retry/recovery, and accessibility …

    line 19
  3. Distinctive:

    Use familiar project conventions and stable, predictable behavior.

    line 25
  4. Distinctive:

    Keep advanced configuration optional and progressively disclosed.

    line 28
  5. Distinctive:

    Use clear labels, keyboard/focus behavior, contrast, and assistive semantics for UI work.

    line 29
  6. Distinctive:

    Do not require users to understand implementation details.

    line 30
  7. Distinctive:

    Document target users or assumptions in an existing appropriate location only when the task authorizes documentation changes or the …

    line 32
  8. Very specific:

    Stop when audience or product intent has multiple high-impact interpretations, a proposed default changes security/privacy/data behavior, …

    line 38

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

End-User Experience Improver

Optimize the common user journey without inventing unsupported product requirements.

Workflow

  1. Read product documentation, existing interfaces, examples, tests, and support signals to identify the target users and their job to be done.
  2. Map the current path from entry to success, including setup, decisions, waiting, errors, recovery, and repeated use.
  3. Identify concrete friction supported by evidence or label it as an assumption.
  4. Choose defaults that serve the common case while keeping advanced controls discoverable.
  5. Preserve established workflows and compatibility unless change is intentional.
  6. Verify the revised path with representative success, invalid input, empty state, permission failure, retry/recovery, and accessibility scenarios where applicable.

Design rules

  • Minimize setup and required decisions before first value.
  • Use familiar project conventions and stable, predictable behavior.
  • Make errors specific, actionable, and safe; preserve user input when recovery permits.
  • Show progress, success, empty, loading, disabled, and failure states when relevant.
  • Keep advanced configuration optional and progressively disclosed.
  • Use clear labels, keyboard/focus behavior, contrast, and assistive semantics for UI work.
  • Do not require users to understand implementation details.

Document target users or assumptions in an existing appropriate location only when the task authorizes documentation changes or the implementation already requires that doc to change. Do not create a new documentation system.

Stop conditions

Stop when audience or product intent has multiple high-impact interpretations, a proposed default changes security/privacy/data behavior, accessibility cannot be evaluated with available context, or reducing friction would break an established contract.

Expected output

Report the target user and task, friction addressed, defaults and recovery paths chosen, scenarios verified, assumptions, and deliberately deferred experience improvements.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.