dashboard-redesign
Skill2 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Redesign a dashboard, KPI view, operational console, or analytical workspace around real decisions and data meaning. Trigger on "redesign this dashboard", "redesign this report", "clean up this analytics view", "improve these KPIs", or "fix this reporting view". Use ux-ui-audit for diagnosis without redesign and design-system-review for library-wide component issues. Do not invent metrics or thresholds.
1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Gonadotrophic-tangent41/ux-ui-skillsedited, first seen Aug 9, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- Gonadotrophic-tangent41/ux-ui-skills★ 071% same
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
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 repository6 other files it gives its agents.
- ai-product-designSkill
- case-study-writerSkill
- design-system-reviewSkill
- handoff-to-devSkill
- product-designSkill
- ux-ui-auditSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. About 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈12
Distinctive · estimate
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 22
If these are unknown, state assumptions and mark metric semantics for owner validation.
- Distinctive: line 36
Remove or demote data that does not support a scoped decision, diagnosis, or required reporting obligation.
- Distinctive: line 38
Checkpoint: Every row ends in a real decision or reporting obligation.
- Distinctive: line 50
Use stable regions and consistent reading order.
- Distinctive: line 52
Do not turn every measure into a card.
- Distinctive: line 58
Read references/visualization-and-metrics.md.
- Distinctive: line 67
Prefer position and length for precise comparison.
- Distinctive: line 69
Checkpoint: Verify each element's question, comparison, data state, and accessible equivalent.
- Distinctive: line 85
Read references/interaction-accessibility-qa.md.
- Distinctive: line 94
Checkpoint: Verify every required state has visible and assistive behavior.
- Distinctive: line 128
Write observable criteria for comprehension, data correctness, interaction, accessibility, responsiveness, and performance.
- Distinctive: line 136
every visible element supports a decision, diagnosis, action, or obligation.
≈ “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.
Files
Dashboard Redesign
Design a decision instrument, not a wall of metrics. Preserve useful density, expose the comparisons that matter, and make data quality and scope legible.
1. Establish the decision model
Identify:
- users: primary role, expertise, frequency, environment, devices, display duration, accessibility, and export needs;
- decisions: required actions, monitoring cadence, acceptable time to notice, and the workflow from signal through investigation to action;
- data: metric definitions, owners, sources, freshness, and latency;
- context: required comparisons, targets, thresholds, and segments.
If these are unknown, state assumptions and mark metric semantics for owner validation. Never infer that a visible number is a KPI.
Checkpoint: State assumptions, have the data owner validate metric meaning and thresholds, revise the decision matrix and affected representations, then re-check until every unresolved semantic question is explicitly marked for decision.
Classify the surface using references/dashboard-models.md. A monitoring board, executive scorecard, operational queue, and analytical workspace need different density and interaction.
2. Inventory decisions before widgets
Build a compact matrix:
Decision | Signal | Comparison | Grain | Freshness | Action | Failure cost
Synthetic example: Which route needs intervention? | Risk state | Operations threshold and shift target | Route | Per vehicle | Open incident | Missed service
Remove or demote data that does not support a scoped decision, diagnosis, or required reporting obligation. Identify missing context before selecting chart types.
Checkpoint: Every row ends in a real decision or reporting obligation; remove the rest.
3. Create the information architecture
Organize the page in this order when it matches the task:
- scope and data state;
- conditions requiring attention;
- core outcome and comparison;
- causes or contributing dimensions;
- records, evidence, and actions.
Use stable regions and consistent reading order. Keep controls near the data they affect. Make global and local filters visually distinct. Preserve active filters, time zone, time range, currency, units, and comparison basis across drilldown.
Do not turn every measure into a card. A compact table or sentence can outperform a chart; a chart can outperform a single number when pattern or comparison matters.
Checkpoint: Trace each region to a matrix row; revise orphaned or duplicated regions.
4. Select representations
Read references/visualization-and-metrics.md. For each element, state:
- the question it answers;
- why this representation is faster or safer than the alternatives;
- the comparison and baseline;
- encoding, units, precision, labels, and ordering;
- accessible equivalent or data access;
- behavior for missing, partial, stale, or delayed data.
Prefer position and length for precise comparison. Avoid 3D, decorative gauges, unbounded color ramps, and charts whose meaning depends on hover. Use direct labels when practical; do not rely on color alone.
Checkpoint: Verify each element's question, comparison, data state, and accessible equivalent; replace failures.
5. Design interactions and drilldown
Define the path:
overview -> notice -> compare -> isolate -> inspect -> act -> confirm -> return
Specify filtering, cross-filtering, sorting, pagination or virtualization, selection, zoom, annotations, saved views, sharing, export, and reset only when the user needs them. Keep the transition from aggregate to record-level evidence reversible and context-preserving.
For operational dashboards, expose ownership, status, age, urgency, and next action. For analytical workspaces, support comparison and hypothesis testing without hiding definitions or silently changing denominators.
Checkpoint: Walk the drilldown forward and back; fix any lost scope, state, or recovery.
6. Cover states and constraints
Read references/interaction-accessibility-qa.md. Define:
- loading, streaming, stale, partial, empty, no-result, error, permission, and offline states;
- responsive priorities and table/chart adaptation;
- keyboard and screen-reader behavior;
- reduced motion and non-color signals;
- latency feedback and expensive-query behavior;
- data lineage, freshness, and definition access.
Checkpoint: Verify every required state has visible and assistive behavior; add gaps before writing the brief.
7. Produce the redesign brief
For a complete input-to-output demonstration, read references/worked-example.md. Use it to calibrate decision architecture and specification depth; do not reuse its fictional metrics or thresholds.
Return:
Diagnosis
Name the dashboard type, primary decisions, dominant failure modes, and evidence confidence in no more than five bullets.
Decision architecture
Provide the decision matrix and proposed section order.
Component specification
For each region use:
Purpose | Content | Representation | Interaction | States | Responsive rule | Accessibility
Synthetic example: Prioritize interventions | Route, risk, age, freshness, owner | Sortable table | Select route; open incident | Empty, stale, permission | Preserve identity, risk, and action | Named sortable headers; non-color status
Metric and chart rationale
Explain additions, removals, merges, and representation changes. Separate definition questions from visual design.
Drilldown contract
Describe scope persistence, transition, detail, actions, and return behavior.
Acceptance criteria
Write observable criteria for comprehension, data correctness, interaction, accessibility, responsiveness, and performance.
Validation plan
Recommend task-based testing with representative users and real or realistic data. Include success signals such as time to detect, interpretation accuracy, decision confidence, error rate, and action completion. Do not use generic satisfaction as the sole measure.
Quality bar
- every visible element supports a decision, diagnosis, action, or obligation;
- metrics expose definition, units, scope, comparison, and freshness where material;
- hierarchy follows urgency and task, not visual novelty;
- density reflects expertise and frequency;
- chart choice matches the analytical question;
- filters and drilldowns preserve context;
- missing and stale data cannot masquerade as zero or current;
- unsupplied metrics, thresholds, baselines, viewport values, density, or styling remain unresolved inputs or labeled proposals, never facts;
- accessibility does not depend on a separate simplified dashboard.
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.

