agentleFS
wpgauravwpgaurav/WordPress-skills/skills/design/critique/SKILL.md

critique

Skill19 starsChanged 22 days agoMITView on GitHub

Evaluate design effectiveness from a UX perspective. Assesses visual hierarchy, information architecture, emotional resonance, and overall design quality with actionable feedback.

80 other projects use a version of this, 25 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use overdrive, arrange and 2 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

    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

  • HK-hubSkill

    arrange

    Improve layout, spacing, and visual rhythm. Fixes monotonous grids, inconsistent spacing, and weak visual hierarchy. Use when the user mentions layout feeling off, spacing issues, visual hierarchy, crowded UI, alignment problems, or wanting better composition.

    Also in 14 projects that use this

  • owshq-mecSkill

    layout

    Improve layout, spacing, and visual rhythm. Fixes monotonous grids, inconsistent spacing, and weak visual hierarchy. Use when the user mentions layout feeling off, spacing issues, visual hierarchy, crowded UI, alignment problems, or wanting better composition.

    Also in 8 projects that use this

  • +1 more from HK-hub

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 73 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 5

    Distinctive

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    First: Use the frontend-design skill for design principles and anti-patterns.

    line 17
  2. Distinctive:

    The test: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this," would they believe you immediately?

    line 29
  3. Distinctive:

    Do size, color, and position communicate importance correctly?

    line 34
  4. Distinctive:

    Do font choices reinforce the brand/tone?

    line 64
  5. Distinctive:

    Don't soften criticism—developers need honest feedback to ship great design

    line 122

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 73 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

Adapted from impeccable by Paul Bakaus, used under the Apache License 2.0. Modified for this collection; see NOTICE.md for what changed.

Conduct a holistic design critique, evaluating whether the interface actually works—not just technically, but as a designed experience. Think like a design director giving feedback.

First: Use the frontend-design skill for design principles and anti-patterns.

Design Critique

Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:

1. AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)

This is the most important check. Does this look like every other AI-generated interface from 2024-2025?

Review the design against ALL the DON'T guidelines in the frontend-design skill—they are the fingerprints of AI-generated work. Check for the AI color palette, gradient text, dark mode with glowing accents, glassmorphism, hero metric layouts, identical card grids, generic fonts, and all other tells.

The test: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this," would they believe you immediately? If yes, that's the problem.

2. Visual Hierarchy

  • Does the eye flow to the most important element first?
  • Is there a clear primary action? Can you spot it in 2 seconds?
  • Do size, color, and position communicate importance correctly?
  • Is there visual competition between elements that should have different weights?

3. Information Architecture

  • Is the structure intuitive? Would a new user understand the organization?
  • Is related content grouped logically?
  • Are there too many choices at once? (cognitive overload)
  • Is the navigation clear and predictable?

4. Emotional Resonance

  • What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
  • Does it match the brand personality?
  • Does it feel trustworthy, approachable, premium, playful—whatever it should feel?
  • Would the target user feel "this is for me"?

5. Discoverability & Affordance

  • Are interactive elements obviously interactive?
  • Would a user know what to do without instructions?
  • Are hover/focus states providing useful feedback?
  • Are there hidden features that should be more visible?

6. Composition & Balance

  • Does the layout feel balanced or uncomfortably weighted?
  • Is whitespace used intentionally or just leftover?
  • Is there visual rhythm in spacing and repetition?
  • Does asymmetry feel designed or accidental?

7. Typography as Communication

  • Does the type hierarchy clearly signal what to read first, second, third?
  • Is body text comfortable to read? (line length, spacing, size)
  • Do font choices reinforce the brand/tone?
  • Is there enough contrast between heading levels?

8. Color with Purpose

  • Is color used to communicate, not just decorate?
  • Does the palette feel cohesive?
  • Are accent colors drawing attention to the right things?
  • Does it work for colorblind users? (not just technically—does meaning still come through?)

9. States & Edge Cases

  • Empty states: Do they guide users toward action, or just say "nothing here"?
  • Loading states: Do they reduce perceived wait time?
  • Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming?
  • Success states: Do they confirm and guide next steps?

10. Microcopy & Voice

  • Is the writing clear and concise?
  • Does it sound like a human (the right human for this brand)?
  • Are labels and buttons unambiguous?
  • Does error copy help users fix the problem?

Generate Critique Report

Structure your feedback as a design director would:

Anti-Patterns Verdict

Start here. Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells from the skill's Anti-Patterns section. Be brutally honest.

Overall Impression

A brief gut reaction—what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.

What's Working

Highlight 2-3 things done well. Be specific about why they work.

Priority Issues

The 3-5 most impactful design problems, ordered by importance:

For each issue:

  • What: Name the problem clearly
  • Why it matters: How this hurts users or undermines goals
  • Fix: What to do about it (be concrete)
  • Command: Which command to use (prefer: /animate, /quieter, /optimize, /adapt, /clarify, /distill, /delight, /onboard, /normalize, /audit, /harden, /polish, /extract, /bolder, /critique, /colorize — or other installed skills you're sure exist)

Minor Observations

Quick notes on smaller issues worth addressing.

Questions to Consider

Provocative questions that might unlock better solutions:

  • "What if the primary action were more prominent?"
  • "Does this need to feel this complex?"
  • "What would a confident version of this look like?"

Remember:

  • Be direct—vague feedback wastes everyone's time
  • Be specific—"the submit button" not "some elements"
  • Say what's wrong AND why it matters to users
  • Give concrete suggestions, not just "consider exploring..."
  • Prioritize ruthlessly—if everything is important, nothing is
  • Don't soften criticism—developers need honest feedback to ship great design

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.