agentleFS
bohewubohewu/agents_pipeline/skills/devtools-ux-audit/SKILL.md

devtools-ux-audit

Skill1 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Collect browser evidence for a declared web journey or formal UX score gate. Use when audit coverage must span specified journeys and viewports.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

12 rules. About 0 are common, 11 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈11

    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:

    Do not use it as the primary workflow for native interfaces that cannot be exercised through a browser.

    line 13
  2. Distinctive:

    If no suitable browser capability is available, do not infer rendered behavior from source alone.

    line 29
  3. Distinctive:

    If this task starts a server, completion requires the URL to stop responding and its expected port to stop listening.

    line 38
  4. Distinctive:

    If this task starts a dedicated browser or DevTools session, completion requires that owned session to be closed.

    line 39
  5. Distinctive:

    Do not assume mobile-first behavior.

    line 51
  6. Distinctive:

    Use one preset consistently unless a defect requires an extra diagnostic size:

    line 55
  7. Distinctive:

    When visual layout, hierarchy, clipping, contrast, or state appearance is material, capture and actually inspect a screenshot at readable …

    line 78
  8. Distinctive:

    When a finding occurs only at one viewport, state that scope.

    line 83
  9. Distinctive:

    Do not claim a console, network, accessibility, or responsive result that was not actually checked.

    line 98
  10. Distinctive:

    Do not lower a desktop-first product's primary score for a compatibility-only mobile defect unless mobile quality is in scope.

    line 103
  11. Distinctive:

    When navigation, authentication, test data, browser tooling, or a local preview blocks part of the journey, report reduced coverage and …

    line 105
  12. Very specific:

    Do not repair the product or repeat an audit to chase a requested score.

    line 107

≈ “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

DevTools UX Audit

Collect browser evidence for one bounded user journey. This is the evidence layer; pair it with $run-ux when the user wants a formal multi-perspective scorecard and synthesized report.

Ordinary verification of an affected component or state may use available browser tooling at that smaller scope. That does not start this journey-audit contract or a $run-ux score gate. When the user requests this audit or a formal gate, preserve the complete declared product profile, journey, viewport, evidence, and not_evaluable requirements below.

Do not use it as the primary workflow for native interfaces that cannot be exercised through a browser.

For a blind audit, keep source code, RepoFindings, implementation intent, and design rationale out of the evaluator handoff. The controller may use them only to locate or start the target. A requested score gate requires complete browser coverage of every declared primary journey and primary viewport; otherwise report not_evaluable.

Capability Preflight

Before auditing:

  1. Identify the available browser capability. Prefer Chrome DevTools tools. An equivalent browser or Playwright workflow is acceptable only if it can preserve viewport, interaction, snapshot, console/network, and screenshot evidence relevant to the task.
  2. Confirm the target URL is reachable.
  3. Decide who owns the local server and browser session.
  4. Select a product profile and viewport preset.

If no suitable browser capability is available, do not infer rendered behavior from source alone. Report the evidence limitation and either stop or perform a clearly labeled source-only review when that still helps.

For Chrome-specific call order and recovery, read references/chrome-devtools.md. For Windows lifecycle details, read references/windows-notes.md.

Ownership and Cleanup

  • A paired server workflow owns startup, readiness, and teardown of a local preview.
  • This task owns only the processes, pages, profiles, or browser sessions it starts. Never kill an unrelated shared browser or server.
  • Reuse an already-authorized page or session when practical.
  • If this task starts a server, completion requires the URL to stop responding and its expected port to stop listening.
  • If this task starts a dedicated browser or DevTools session, completion requires that owned session to be closed.
  • Record incomplete cleanup as a blocker or limitation; do not treat a disconnected tool as proof that the underlying process stopped.

Choose the Product Profile

Select one before interaction:

  • desktop-web: desktop is primary; mobile is normally compatibility-only
  • responsive-web: desktop, tablet, and mobile are scored
  • desktop-app: browser-hosted desktop UI; small viewports are compatibility-only unless requested
  • mobile-web: mobile is primary

Do not assume mobile-first behavior.

Choose a Viewport Preset

Use one preset consistently unless a defect requires an extra diagnostic size:

  • desktop-2: 1366x768, 1920x1080
  • desktop-3: 1366x768, 1440x900, 1920x1080
  • responsive-core: 390x844, 768x1024, 1366x768
  • mobile-core: 375x812, 390x844, plus secondary 430x932

The bundled helper emits a deterministic plan. Inspect its interface before use:

python3 scripts/viewport_plan.py --help
python3 scripts/viewport_plan.py --profile desktop-web --format text

Evidence Loop

For each scored viewport:

  1. Navigate to the exact entry page and apply the viewport.
  2. Capture a fresh semantic snapshot before interacting.
  3. Execute the same target journey using normal-user inputs.
  4. Record friction under discoverability, clarity, efficiency, confidence, and recovery.
  5. Capture console or network evidence when it explains behavior.
  6. When visual layout, hierarchy, clipping, contrast, or state appearance is material, capture and actually inspect a screenshot at readable scale. A file path or semantic snapshot alone is not visual evidence.
  7. Summarize the viewport before moving on.

Prefer semantic snapshots for routine inspection and screenshots for genuinely visual claims. Do not reuse stale evidence after navigation or a meaningful state change. For before/after or reference comparison, keep viewport, locale, theme, data, selected state, and zoom comparable; wait for fonts/assets to settle. Record mismatches and unavailable evidence rather than inventing visual scores. These comparison notes do not grant product-repair authority.

When a finding occurs only at one viewport, state that scope. Keep desktop-primary findings separate from compatibility-only mobile findings.

Evidence Record

For each material observation, record:

  • profile and viewport
  • page or state
  • attempted user action
  • observed result
  • evidence type: snapshot, screenshot, console, network, or interaction outcome
  • severity or task impact
  • confidence and any limitation
  • for visual claims, the screenshot actually viewed, relevant region, and comparison conditions; label visual claims unverified if image inspection is unavailable

Do not claim a console, network, accessibility, or responsive result that was not actually checked.

Reporting Discipline

  • Score only the viewports included in the selected product profile.
  • Do not lower a desktop-first product's primary score for a compatibility-only mobile defect unless mobile quality is in scope.
  • Separate observed evidence from inference.
  • When navigation, authentication, test data, browser tooling, or a local preview blocks part of the journey, report reduced coverage and confidence.
  • Include cleanup evidence for resources started by this task.
  • Do not repair the product or repeat an audit to chase a requested score. Return the observed evidence once; $run-ux owns the terminal gate decision.

The repo-level protocol contains the durable audit contract: ../../protocols/UX_DEVTOOLS_WORKFLOW.md.

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.