ui-state-completeness
Skill2 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Find and repair missing UI states or transitions in an interactive component or flow, including async ordering, stale data, partial failures, and interrupted actions when relevant. Use for behavior gaps, not merely screenshot polish.
In this repository18 other files it gives its agents.
- check-my-analysisSkill
- clean-handoffSkill
- clean-upSkill
- decision-coachSkill
- design-system-fitSkill
- feedback-to-findingsSkill
- form-flow-fixerSkill
- gameplanSkill
- knowledge-interviewSkill
- measure-successSkill
- meeting-briefSkill
- motion-resilienceSkill
- practice-coachSkill
- proposal-reviewerSkill
- reconcile-reportsSkill
- research-briefSkill
- simplify-reportSkill
- ui-stress-testSkill
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 12
Read the component, state ownership, request lifecycle, and product behavior.
- Very specific: line 14
Use assets/transition-cases.json to choose relevant sequences.
- Distinctive: line 20
Check what happens when a component closes, navigates away, loses eligibility, or changes selection while work is pending.
≈ “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
UI state completeness
Inspect what the component can actually do and how it moves between states. Do not add every imaginable state to a simple component.
Build the relevant state map
Read the component, state ownership, request lifecycle, and product behavior. Record current states and the user/system events that change them. Include guards, pending work, visible feedback, available actions, and completion conditions. Mark unresolved product choices rather than silently making consequential new policies.
Use assets/transition-cases.json to choose relevant sequences. The cases are probes, not assumed requirements. Omit impossible transitions with a reason. Keep layout stress and broad accessibility audits scoped to what this behavior requires.
Verify transitions, not just pictures
Exercise the main path and meaningful transitions into and out of loading, empty, error, populated, disabled, or partial states. For async work, control response ordering with existing local fixtures or network interception. Check that stale responses cannot replace current intent where latest-request behavior is required.
Check what happens when a component closes, navigates away, loses eligibility, or changes selection while work is pending. Verify the model and visible UI remain consistent. Cancellation of a client request does not prove cancellation of a server operation. Keep uncertain remote outcomes explicit.
For retained data during refresh, distinguish stale usable content from current results and full failure. For partial results, check that failed items are identifiable and any retry targets the intended work. Honor the application's real contracts for permissions, concurrency, and persistence.
Repair and prove
For audits, report reproduced gaps and unresolved choices. For fixes, implement the smallest coherent state change using existing patterns. Avoid scattered flags that allow contradictory states; choose explicit state ownership when it materially simplifies correctness, without forcing a new state-machine library.
Re-run the failing event sequence and neighboring transitions. Record initial state, events in order, controlled response timing, final state, and evidence. Use deterministic tests for races and lifecycle failures when appropriate. A fixture proves simulated behavior; identify unavailable backend integration separately.
Deliver the important findings or repairs and the relevant transition coverage. Do not infer complete behavior coverage from a gallery of static state screenshots.
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.

