agentleFS
Sign inStart free
educlopezeduclopez/ui-craft/.agents/skills/audit/SKILL.md

audit

Skill441 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Technical UI audit — a11y, performance, responsive. Produces a prioritized findings table. Invoke when the user asks for audit on their UI, or mentions 'audit' alongside design / UI / frontend work.

193 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use teach-impeccable, overdrive and 4 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.
  • HK-hubSkill

    teach-impeccable

    One-time setup that gathers design context for your project and saves it to your AI config file. Run once to establish persistent design guidelines.

    Also in 19 projects that use this

  • HK-hubSkill

    overdrive

    Pushes interfaces past conventional limits with technically ambitious implementations — shaders, spring physics, scroll-driven reveals, 60fps animations. Use when the user wants to wow, impress, go all-out, or make something that feels extraordinary.

    Also in 25 projects that use this

  • zwy123zwySkill

    normalize

    将用户随意输入的提示词规范化为结构清晰、便于大模型执行的标准化提示词。适用于需要整理、统一提示词格式时调用。

    Also in 19 projects that use this

  • SkillPilotCHSkill

    level-up

    Eine Automatisierung pro Woche finden, scopen, shippen. Output landet als proposed-Eintrag in cadence.md mit konkreten Implementations-Schritten.

    Also in 12 projects that use this

  • ww-w-aiSkill

    pm-discovery

    PM Agent Team - Automated product discovery, strategy, and PRD generation. Runs PM analysis workflow to produce comprehensive PRD before PDCA Plan phase.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • +1 more from HK-hub

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

7 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 175 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 4

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 3

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Run a technical audit of the UI at $ARGUMENTS.

    line 10
  2. Distinctive:

    Do not begin the review until visuals are captured or provided.

    line 26
  3. Very specific:

    If the user declines to provide screenshots, run a code-only pass and clearly mark the report [CODE-ONLY REVIEW — visual issues not …

    line 28
  4. Very specific:

    Only transform / opacity animated (no width/top/height)

    line 42
  5. Distinctive:

    No layout thrash in scroll/resize handlers

    line 46
  6. Distinctive:

    No horizontal scroll at 320px

    line 51
  7. Distinctive:

    Do NOT rewrite code unless asked.

    line 60

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 175 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md
<!-- HARNESS MIRROR — do not edit here. Canonical source: skills/ or commands/. After editing source, copy into cli/assets/<harness>/ and repo-root harness mirrors. -->

Context: this sub-skill is one lens of the broader ui-craft skill. If the ui-craft skill is also installed, read its SKILL.md first for Discovery + Anti-Slop + Craft Test, then apply the specific lens below.

Run a technical audit of the UI at $ARGUMENTS. Load the ui-craft skill and apply the audit lens.

Step 0: Visual capture (mandatory)

Code-only review is insufficient. Every audit/critique starts with the surface as the user sees it. Try the following in order; use the first one available:

  1. Playwright MCP — if playwright MCP server is available, use it. Capture full-page screenshots at three viewports: desktop (1280×800), tablet (768×1024), mobile (375×812). Capture dark mode if the app supports it.
  2. Browser DevTools / Chrome MCP — second choice; same viewport set.
  3. Other browser automation (agent-browser, cursor-ide-browser) — third choice.
  4. Ask the user — last resort. If no automation is available, request screenshots from the user before proceeding. Be specific:
    • "Visual review needs screenshots. Please provide:
      • Full-page at 1280px (desktop)
      • Full-page at 768px (tablet)
      • Full-page at 375px (mobile)
      • Dark mode of each, if supported."

Do not begin the review until visuals are captured or provided. State this explicitly to the user when no automation succeeds — don't silently fall back to code-only review.

If the user declines to provide screenshots, run a code-only pass and clearly mark the report [CODE-ONLY REVIEW — visual issues not assessed] at the top so the limitation is explicit.

Note: audit is knob-agnostic — accessibility and performance are not tunable.

Scope (non-negotiable checks):

  1. Accessibility — read references/accessibility.md:
    • Visible :focus-visible on every interactive element
    • Keyboard reachable, no focus traps
    • Touch targets ≥ 44px (mobile)
    • Color not the only signal for state
    • Form labels, error association, required indication
    • prefers-reduced-motion honored for all animations
  2. Performance — read references/motion.md Rendering Performance section:
    • Only transform / opacity animated (no width/top/height)
    • No transition: all
    • will-change scoped to active interaction, removed after
    • Images have width/height or aspect-ratio (CLS)
    • No layout thrash in scroll/resize handlers
  3. Responsive — read references/responsive.md:
    • Mobile-first breakpoints, no fixed-width components
    • env(safe-area-inset-*) respected on fixed elements
    • Touch zones don't overlap
    • No horizontal scroll at 320px

Output format — the Review Format table from SKILL.md:

BeforeAfterWhy

Group findings by priority: Critical (blocks usability/a11y) → High-impact (immediately noticeable) → Quick wins (polish).

Do NOT rewrite code unless asked. Report findings first; wait for approval before editing.

Close with a Craft Report (references/review.md → Craft Report), wrapping the findings table above — Checked states scope (a11y/perf/responsive, at which viewports), Passed carries anything inspected and found sound, Changed stays empty pre-approval, Verdict names the top priority. Produce it even on a clean audit — a11y/perf/responsive coming back clean is the finding.

Next step: /harden — turn the findings into real production coverage (rung 1).

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.

Check your setup, free