quality-loop
Skill9 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Loop UI work until quality gates pass — judge/build, test, audit, fix, repeat. Use for “rapihin sampai bagus”, polish until audit passes, fix Critical/High design findings, or /polish. Do not use for one-shot “rapihin detail”, copy-only rewrites, or “rapikan kode”.
7 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- cskwork/quality-loop-skilltheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- TomSzenessy/AI_TEMPLATEtheir own version, first seen Nov 6, 2026
- crftwr/keyhactheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- cskwork/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 17, 2026
- Thingscorp/skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 25, 2026
- CodyAMaughan/agent-first-engineeringtheir own version, first seen Aug 10, 2026
Other versions7 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 7
- crftwr/keyhac★ 14same name
- CodyAMaughan/agent-first-engineering★ 3same name
- cskwork/skills★ 3same name
- cskwork/quality-loop-skill★ 1same name
- Thingscorp/skills★ 1same name
- gavinzzc/quality-loop★ 0same name
- TomSzenessy/AI_TEMPLATE★ 0same name
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 repository36 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- .cursor/rules/design-system-enforcer.mdcCursor rule
- frontend-expertSkill
- accessibilitySkill
- anti-slop-codeSkill
- anti-slop-designSkill
- app-shellSkill
- architectureSkill
- componentsSkill
- content-designSkill
- data-fetchingSkill
- design-colorSkill
- design-directionSkill
- design-foundationsSkill
- design-surfacesSkill
- design-typographySkill
- design-vocabularySkill
- devtoolsSkill
- engineering-vocabularySkill
- fidelitySkill
- formsSkill
- frontend-expertSkill
- marketingSkill
- monitoringSkill
- motion-inspectionSkill
- motionSkill
- performanceSkill
- polishSkill
- prototypeSkill
- responsiveSkill
- seoSkill
- skill-authoringSkill
- testingSkill
- tokensSkill
- webglSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
10 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.
6
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 14
Run a tight quality loop until the UI clears gates (or hit the iteration cap).
- Very specific: line 28
After a /design//audit with Critical/High findings and user wants them cleared
- Distinctive: line 69
Medium/Low: do not block DONE unless the user asked for zero findings.
- Distinctive: line 71
Do not invent a test stack just to satisfy the Tests gate — waive and list residual risk.
- Distinctive: line 75
Default max 3 full AUDIT→FIX cycles after the first build
- Very specific: line 84
After direction: (+ prototype if comparing/stressing) → tokens → (+ marketing if landing) → (+ app-shell / data-fetching / forms if needed) …
- Distinctive: line 92
All Critical/High clear → DONE (report scorecard + remaining Medium/Low)
- Distinctive: line 99
Prefer token/system fixes over one-off hacks
- Distinctive: line 101
Do not expand scope to unrelated pages
- Very specific: line 149
Test: testing (+ devtools when measuring)
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 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.
Files
UI Quality Loop
Overview
Run a tight quality loop until the UI clears gates (or hit the iteration cap). This is the pack’s mini lifecycle — not full /spec→/ship, but build → prove → audit → fix until it’s good.
JUDGE* → BUILD → TEST → AUDIT ──Critical/High──▶ FIX ──▶ TEST → AUDIT …
│
PASS → DONE* Judgment only on blank-canvas / first pass (see design-direction skip rules).
When to use
- User asks “rapihin sampai bagus”, “sampai lulus audit”, keep iterating until gates pass
/polishor natural language equivalent of the loop- After a
/design//auditwith Critical/High findings and user wants them cleared
When to skip
- “Rapihin detail” / feels off →
polish(one pass) - Copy / “tulisan AI” →
content-design - “Rapikan kode” →
anti-slop-code - Single-line token tweak with no quality ask
- Pure audit with no fix permission (“audit saja”)
- User said stop / “cukup” / accepted remaining Medium/Low
Agents (orchestrate — do not nest personas forever)
| Step | Agent |
| Judgment + build + fix | ui-developer |
| Test | test-engineer |
| Audit | design-reviewer |
You (the session agent) are the loop controller. Personas do not call each other; you invoke their workflows in sequence.
Gates (pass / fail)
| Gate | Pass when |
| Anti-slop | No Critical/High AI-aesthetic findings |
| UI feel | No Critical/High craft issues on touched UI (concentric radius, hit overlap, transition: all, broken press/enter) |
| Control geometry | radius follows project tokens; text/icon variants are optically balanced; pending/disabled/focus states do not shift geometry |
| Tokens | No Critical/High raw-hex / off-token issues; greenfield pack preset used decision tree + Token score / (explicit) / (hard-gate) / project system in Conventions check |
| Responsive | Conventions Responsive line present; full-width primary CTA <768; no Critical/High desktop-only layout on greenfield (320–1440) |
| Hierarchy | Hierarchy pass (one primary focus + one primary CTA) or waiver for tiny tweaks |
| Typography | One h1/page + sequential ladder (or waiver) |
| Motion | Shell light defaults or named families/patterns from motion-families.md; no decorative spam; reduced-motion; hand-roll (not registry default) |
| Shell | Theme in topbar; avatar → account menu; custom selects (or waivers) on dashboards |
| Landing | Marketing section stack via marketing (not hero-only; hand-roll) — or n/a for app-shell-only |
| A11y | No Critical keyboard/label/contrast findings (potential or measured) |
| States | Loading/error/empty handled for interactive surfaces touched |
| Tests | Planned critical cases green, or explicit waiver if no test runner / out of scope (document why) |
| Perf (soft) | No Critical obvious LCP/CLS footguns in touched UI; else note as remaining |
Loop continues while any Critical or High remains on touched UI. Medium/Low do not block DONE unless the user asked for zero findings.
Do not invent a test stack just to satisfy the Tests gate — waive and list residual risk.
Iteration cap
- Default max 3 full AUDIT→FIX cycles after the first build
- On cap: stop, ship best effort, list remaining findings + what would need another round
- Never infinite-loop
Workflow
Round 0 — Direction + build
- Load
design-directionif non-trivial / blank-canvas - After direction: (+
prototypeif comparing/stressing) →tokens→ (+marketingif landing) → (+app-shell/data-fetching/formsif needed) →components→ (+design-surfaceswhen radius/control geometry is implicated) →anti-slop-code→responsive→motion(light shell; marketing = families/patterns frommotion-families.md, hand-roll) →anti-slop-design→polish→accessibility(+webgl/seoif needed) - Produce UI + Conventions check (
references/compliance-gates.md)
Each cycle — Prove + audit + fix
- TEST —
testingviatest-engineer(/test-ui workflow) for touched surfaces - AUDIT —
design-reviewerscorecard (/design or /audit). Mark unevaluated honestly. - DECIDE
- All Critical/High clear → DONE (report scorecard + remaining Medium/Low)
- Else if iterations left → FIX with
ui-developer(only findings that block gates; includedesign-surfaceswhen radius is implicated) - Else → STOP at cap with remaining list
Fix discipline
- Fix highest severity first
- Prefer token/system fixes over one-off hacks
- Re-run TEST for behavior you changed
- Do not expand scope to unrelated pages
Output template (every cycle)
## Quality loop — cycle N/3
### Test
- … pass/fail …
### Audit scorecard
| Metric | Status | Notes |
|--------|--------|-------|
| … | … | … |
### Blocking (Critical/High)
1. …
### Action
FIX … | DONE | STOP (cap)Final output (DONE or STOP)
- What shipped / changed
- Final scorecard
- Remaining Medium/Low (if any)
- Cycles used
Checklist
- Judgment only when blank-canvas / first pass (skip rules honored)
- Build chain includes responsive + motion (+ marketing if landing) or waivers
- Gates table evaluated each cycle (Anti-slop, Feel, Tokens, Responsive, Hierarchy, Typography, Motion, Shell, Landing, A11y, States, Tests)
- Shell chrome: theme topbar + avatar menu + custom selects (or waivers)
- Marketing landing: section stack hand-roll (or n/a / waiver)
- Conventions check filled before DONE
- Control geometry Conventions line covers radius token, text/icon optical balance, and relevant states (or valid n/a/waiver)
- Cap ≤3 fix cycles; STOP lists remaining Critical/High if any
- No fabricated audit scores
Depth
Craft review: use references/prototype.md → Craft comparison, not a taste score for matched captures, local readability and causal fixes. Geometry exceptions follow references/component-patterns.md: explicit measured morph needs endpoint/playback evidence and stable neighboring targets; accidental shifts remain defects.
- Lifecycle A→Z:
references/fe-lifecycle.md - Judgment:
design-direction - Build:
tokens,components,design-surfaceswhen radius is implicated,anti-slop-code,responsive,motion(motion-families.md),anti-slop-design,polish,accessibility - Test:
testing(+devtoolswhen measuring) - Audit:
design-reviewer+references/anti-patterns.md/references/polish.md/ a11y / performance as needed
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.

