ui-ux-concept-implementation
Skill68 starsChanged 7 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Implement a selected mockup, screenshot, or visual reference in an existing project and compare the rendered result. Use when visual fidelity drives the work; use dashboard guidance for operational surfaces when it fits better.
In this repository16 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- agents-md-generatorSkill
- brainstorm-firstSkill
- debugging-workflowSkill
- design-system-generatorSkill
- docker-local-devSkill
- documentation-guidelinesSkill
- laravel-11-12-app-guidelinesSkill
- laravel-13-app-guidelinesSkill
- office-web-ui-systemSkill
- performance-optimizationSkill
- project-development-mindsetSkill
- run-reviewable-subtask-loopSkill
- testing-verificationSkill
- vps-docker-traefik-deploySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. About 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈7
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 15
Run in the main conversation by default.
- Distinctive: line 23
If the selected target is an operational dashboard and a dashboard-specific workflow better fits the task, use that guidance directly.
- Distinctive: line 33
Treat existing project instructions, design-system sources, components, tokens, content, assets, responsive conventions, and accessibility …
- Distinctive: line 53
Add a dependency only when project tools cannot reasonably satisfy a material part of the visual contract and the tradeoff is clear.
- Distinctive: line 58
Follow the host and project browser-testing policy instead of assuming one universal tool.
- Distinctive: line 67
Verify relevant responsive behavior, keyboard-visible focus, and interaction states.
- Distinctive: line 70
If no real rendering environment is available, perform the closest useful source-level check, report the gap, and do not claim visual …
≈ “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/UX Concept Implementation
Overview
Turn a selected visual direction into working UI while preserving the project's product identity and producing browser evidence against the target.
Delegation
Run in the main conversation by default. Delegation can increase usage: obtain explicit approval for the proposed agent count and scope before using subagents. Reuse that approval within its bounds; ask again before expanding the approved count or scope.
Establish The Visual Contract
- Confirm that one direction is selected. A single user-supplied mockup, screenshot, or reference site is a selected target. If materially different concepts remain unselected, obtain the user's selection unless they already authorized choosing an approach.
- If the selected target is an operational dashboard and a dashboard-specific workflow better fits the task, use that guidance directly. Otherwise continue with this general visual-reference workflow.
- Inspect the target and the current rendered UI at the relevant routes, viewports, themes, data states, and interaction states. Ask a narrow question only when unresolved ambiguity would produce materially different results.
- Classify the target's visible decisions as exact (must match), adaptable (translate into the product's visual language), or unspecified (follow established project conventions). Record only the distinctions needed to guide implementation and verification.
- Treat existing project instructions, design-system sources, components, tokens, content, assets, responsive conventions, and accessibility patterns as constraints. Do not replace suitable project identity merely because the reference uses a different system.
- Preserve the selected concept outside committed source only when later comparison genuinely needs a durable artifact. Prefer an existing ignored or environment-managed location; do not create project files or modify ignore configuration solely for transient persistence without authorization.
Implement The Direction
- Map the visual contract to project-owned routes, components, styles, tokens, assets, and representative content. Reuse existing surfaces when their semantics fit; introduce new ones only for a concrete gap.
- Recreate the target's structure, hierarchy, rhythm, responsive intent, and interactions without copying proprietary source, private assets, tracking code, or brand-identifying content that the user is not authorized to use.
- Preserve product behavior and accessible semantics while adapting visual details. Cover only the loading, empty, error, validation, focus, or other states that the affected surface can meaningfully enter.
- Add a dependency only when project tools cannot reasonably satisfy a material part of the visual contract and the tradeoff is clear.
Compare In A Real Rendering Environment
- Follow the host and project browser-testing policy instead of assuming one universal tool. Capture the smallest useful region, using full-page images only when composition, scrolling, or surrounding context matters.
- Compare the target, before state, and updated state at equivalent viewports, theme, data, account, and interaction state when practical. Disclose any mismatch in comparison conditions.
- Iterate on material differences in layout, hierarchy, spacing, typography, color, imagery, overflow, text fit, and interaction. Stop when the visual contract is satisfied or when a concrete blocker requires user direction.
- Verify relevant responsive behavior, keyboard-visible focus, and interaction states. Keep exploratory browser evidence distinct from source-controlled automated E2E coverage.
- If no real rendering environment is available, perform the closest useful source-level check, report the gap, and do not claim visual fidelity.
Final Handoff
Report:
- The selected target and any important exact-versus-adaptable decisions.
- Files changed.
- Browser verification performed, including evidence paths when available.
- Remaining visual mismatches, unverified states or viewports, and comparison limitations.
- The location and uncommitted status of any temporary concept artifact, only when one was actually created.
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.

