layers-intro
Skill307 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub
Framework orientation for Layers of Product Design — load this first; provides the context all other skills depend on
3 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- davidanthonyn/claude-skillsedited, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- pengGgxp/skillsword for word, first seen Oct 11, 2026
- miovrag/claude-skillsword for word, first seen Jun 12, 2026
Other versions3 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 2
- miovrag/claude-skills★ 1100% same
- pengGgxp/skills★ 1100% same
Edited · 1
- davidanthonyn/claude-skills★ 092% 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 repository8 other files it gives its agents.
- layers-conceptual-modelSkill
- layers-domainSkill
- layers-interaction-flowSkill
- layers-observed-behaviourSkill
- layers-orientSkill
- layers-product-strategySkill
- layers-surfaceSkill
- layers-user-needsSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
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
- Distinctive: line 66
Check foundations before building upward: Before working on an upper layer, audit the layer below.
- Distinctive: line 69
Steer, don't be steered: Don't jump to surface output before foundational decisions are made.
- Very specific: line 116
When writing Mermaid diagrams, use <br/> for line breaks inside node labels — not \n, which renders as literal text.
≈ “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
/layers-intro
Load this skill at the start of any design session. It provides the framework context that all other /layers-* skills depend on.
The framework
Layers of Product Design organises design work into seven layers across three zones. Layers have logical dependency: lower layers are foundations for upper ones. Weak lower layers create UX debt that propagates upward.
Reality — complex, contradictory, evolving. Source of all learning.
Problem space — knowledge gathered from reality:
- Observed behaviour — what users actually do
- The domain — concepts, terminology, and mental models that exist independently of any product
- User needs — what we think users are trying to achieve, and why
Solution space — deliberate decisions about what to build: 4. Product & service strategy — which needs to serve, and what business outcomes to target 5. Conceptual model — objects, relationships, states, vocabulary — independent of any interface 6. Interaction structure and flow — places, affordances, connections, and flow logic 7. Surface — words, visuals, feedback, hierarchy — what users actually encounter
The layers are not a linear process. Enter anywhere — but always check whether the foundations below are sound.
Inspired by Jesse James Garrett's The Elements of User Experience (2000).
Design is decision-making
Design = making decisions about the form of a solution (Christopher Alexander). Form is the solution; context is the requirements, constraints, and environment it must fit. Good design is good fit.
Four kinds of progress:
- Making decisions — resolving something undecided
- Uncovering unmade decisions — discovering what hasn't been decided yet (often more valuable than 1)
- Evaluating decisions — identifying decisions already made that are risky, inconsistent, or wrong
- Prioritising decisions — lower layers are more foundational and carry more risk if wrong
The job of every skill is to help the designer make better decisions — not to make decisions for them.
How to use these skills
Each /layers-* skill is a library of techniques for one layer — not a script to run start to finish. Don't march through every step and emit a stack of artefacts. Instead:
- Find the live decisions. What at this layer is genuinely undecided, risky, or worth surfacing? (
/layers-orientfinds these across all layers if you're not sure.) If nothing here is live, say so and move on — don't manufacture work to fill the structure. - Offer a technique that fits the decision. Each skill lists techniques with the situations they suit. Suggest one or two and let the designer choose. A technique is a way to make a specific decision, not a box to fill.
- Work the decision; capture only the residue. Produce what the decision needs — usually a few lines, sometimes a diagram — not a full report. The conversation is the working surface; the capture is what survives it.
Each skill names the decisions that layer makes and the disciplines that keep it honest. Those are the spine. The wording of any individual prompt is disposable; the decision it serves is not.
Principles — apply across all sessions
- Decisions, not outputs. Artefacts are useful only insofar as they represent decisions made or surfaced. Name the decision, not just the diagram.
- Uncover before you resolve. Surfacing decisions the designer didn't know they needed to make is often more valuable than answering the ones they did.
- Work at one layer at a time. Conflating problem space and solution space, or surface and conceptual model, produces confused outputs.
- Check foundations before building upward. Before working on an upper layer, audit the layer below. Flag instability.
- The conceptual model is the most neglected load-bearing layer. Give it more attention than feels comfortable.
- Flag bad decisions, not just missing ones. A decision already made that's risky or inconsistent needs to be named, not worked around.
- Steer, don't be steered. Don't jump to surface output before foundational decisions are made.
- Design principles vs. implementation decisions. Some decisions can be stated without knowing system constraints — what should happen from the user's perspective. Others are entangled with implementation: articulate the user experience requirement, form a well-shaped question, and carry it into a design+engineering conversation. Don't force a premature answer.
- Capture decisions, not transcripts. Default to lightweight output: the decisions made, the decisions surfaced, and the open questions — nothing more. Don't generate a document longer than the user will actually reread; the conversation is already a record. A diagram earns its place only when it encodes a decision. The "Produce" list in each skill is a menu of what can be captured — not a mandate to write all of it. Offer to expand only if asked.
- Push forward, pull back. The layers aren't a one-way climb. When the work at a layer feels unjustified or floating — you're elaborating structure with no clear reason to — it's often because you can't yet see what will depend on it. Probe a layer or two up (sketch a flow, a screen, a bet) to discover what the lower layer actually needs, then come back down and do that work, now clearer and connected to a path. Probing upward to learn is not the same as committing upward to build: don't finalise an upper layer on an unstable lower one, but don't refuse to glance up either.
The time dimension — probe proactively
Temporal decisions are frequently overlooked. They cluster at two layers:
Conceptual model layer:
- Intermediate action states — does an object pass through transitional states (saving, processing, pending approval) before resolving? Those are model states.
- Read model lag — gap between when data is written and when it's visible? Articulate the user need; flag as a named open question for engineering.
- Relationship temporality — "all products in Europe" means the group now, or membership as it changes? This is a design decision.
- Deletion semantics — archive, trash, hard delete, or regulatory delete? State which and why. Implementation follows.
- History — does it matter what an object was in the past? Stating it matters is a design decision.
Interaction structure layer:
- Post-action state — after submitting, what does the user see? Does a redirected list immediately reflect the change?
- Optimistic vs. pessimistic updates — show assumed result before server confirms, or wait? State the preference; flag as an open question if implementation is uncertain.
- Empty, loading, partial states — every place has a temporal lifecycle. Design all of them.
- Error and failure paths — validation failure, server error, network disconnection, concurrent edit. Required design steps, not afterthoughts.
Failure mode signals
OOUX object failure modes (Sophia Prater):
- Shapeshifter — same object in significantly different forms across contexts. Surface fix: consistent object treatment. Deeper fix if the model doesn't define the object clearly.
- Masked — different object types look identical. Surface fix: distinct visual treatments. Deeper fix if the model doesn't differentiate them.
- Broken — object's data and actions scattered across screens with no cross-linking. Interaction structure problem →
/layers-interaction-flow. - Isolated — objects exist without visible relationships to other objects. Conceptual model problem →
/layers-conceptual-model.
Nielsen's heuristics — a root-layer mapping: "Match between system and real world" violations almost always root in the conceptual model, not the surface. "User control and freedom" is an interaction structure decision. Patching these at the surface treats symptoms, not causes.
Capturing work
Capture is opt-in and lightweight by default. Ask once, early:
"Do you want me to save a short summary of this session's decisions, or keep it in the conversation? If saving: a Markdown file in your project (Mermaid diagrams render natively in VSCode with the Markdown Preview Mermaid Support extension), Notion (if the MCP is connected), or somewhere else?"
Whatever the destination, bias to brevity (principle 9): capture the decisions, not a retelling of the discussion. A page someone rereads beats ten pages they skim once. If a fuller write-up would genuinely help, offer it — don't assume it.
When writing Mermaid diagrams, use <br/> for line breaks inside node labels — not \n, which renders as literal text.
Where to start
- Not sure where to focus? →
/layers-orient— rapid diagnostic across all seven layers - Know which layer you're at? → jump directly to that skill
Skills: /layers-observed-behaviour · /layers-domain · /layers-user-needs · /layers-product-strategy · /layers-conceptual-model · /layers-interaction-flow · /layers-surface
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.

