ios-app-design
Skill62 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Design or review iOS navigation, layout, accessibility, and system materials using the project's target OS and UI framework.
In this repository33 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .claude/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- animation-vocabularySkill
- apple-designSkill
- branchSkill
- codebase-designSkill
- code-qualitySkill
- commitSkill
- emil-design-engSkill
- english-modeSkill
- find-animation-opportunitiesSkill
- find-skillsSkill
- grillingSkill
- handoffSkill
- improve-animationsSkill
- investigateSkill
- nix-darwinSkill
- no-useeffectSkill
- prototypeSkill
- react-best-practicesSkill
- resolving-merge-conflictsSkill
- review-animationsSkill
- rust-design-patternsSkill
- self-reviewSkill
- seo-audit-fullSkill
- seo-auditSkill
- skill-creatorSkill
- slow-is-fastSkill
- ste-writingSkill
- tddSkill
- thermo-nuclear-code-quality-reviewSkill
- thermo-nuclear-reviewSkill
- thermosSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
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 13
Use familiar system navigation and controls when they support the task.
- Distinctive: line 14
Keep content readable and actions reachable across supported sizes, orientations, text sizes, and appearances.
- Distinctive: line 17
Treat Liquid Glass adoption as a compatibility and design decision.
- Distinctive: line 34
Read only references relevant to the current decision.
≈ “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
iOS App Design
Choose interface behavior that fits the product, target OS, and existing UI framework. Inspect deployment targets and current components before proposing new APIs or visual-system adoption.
Design Criteria
- Use familiar system navigation and controls when they support the task. Preserve established product behavior unless a redesign is requested.
- Keep content readable and actions reachable across supported sizes, orientations, text sizes, and appearances.
- Include accessibility semantics, sufficient contrast, and reduced-motion behavior appropriate to the interaction.
- Give immediate feedback for actions. Distinguish motion polish from actual rendering, network, or input latency.
- Treat Liquid Glass adoption as a compatibility and design decision. Do not replace opaque backgrounds or custom controls merely to match a newer OS style; consider readability, accessibility settings, and the requested scope.
- Apply SwiftUI, UIKit, and React Native examples only within the matching implementation environment. Verify version-sensitive APIs against installed tooling and official Apple documentation before use.
Read by Decision
| Decision | Reference |
| Adopting or tuning Liquid Glass materials | Liquid Glass |
| Choosing tabs, navigation stacks, modals, or search | Navigation |
| Safe areas, adaptive layout, or iPad presentation | Layout |
| Text hierarchy and Dynamic Type | Typography |
| Semantic colors, contrast, or theme behavior | Color and theme |
| Symbols, imagery, or app icons | Icons and imagery |
| Transitions, springs, or gesture continuity | Motion |
| VoiceOver, contrast, and accessibility settings | Accessibility |
| Haptic and visual feedback | Haptics and feedback |
Read only references relevant to the current decision. Their examples and preferred values are starting points, not universal adoption requirements.
Completion
For implementation, inspect the affected interface in the available runtime and check relevant interaction and accessibility states. Use the global test policy; do not add logic tests for visual polish alone.
For review, separate observable usability or accessibility defects from aesthetic suggestions. Report what was inspected and any device or OS coverage gaps; do not claim visual verification from source inspection.
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.

