ux-review
Multi-perspective UX review combining usability heuristics, WCAG accessibility checks, and interaction design analysis. Use when reviewing UI components before release, evaluating user flows for usability issues, conducting design critiques, or auditing accessibility compliance.
Best use case
ux-review is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Multi-perspective UX review combining usability heuristics, WCAG accessibility checks, and interaction design analysis. Use when reviewing UI components before release, evaluating user flows for usability issues, conducting design critiques, or auditing accessibility compliance.
Teams using ux-review should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/ux-review/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How ux-review Compares
| Feature / Agent | ux-review | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Multi-perspective UX review combining usability heuristics, WCAG accessibility checks, and interaction design analysis. Use when reviewing UI components before release, evaluating user flows for usability issues, conducting design critiques, or auditing accessibility compliance.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
# UX Review Comprehensive user experience review that coordinates usability, accessibility, and interaction design perspectives for thorough analysis of components, flows, or features. ## When to Use This Skill - Reviewing new components or features before release - Evaluating existing flows for usability issues - PR reviews that touch UI/UX code - Design system component reviews - Onboarding flow or checkout flow optimization - Avoid using for purely visual/aesthetic reviews — use `ui-design-aesthetics` instead ## Workflow ### Step 1: Gather Context Answer these questions before reviewing: 1. What is the user trying to accomplish? 2. What is this component's role in the larger flow? 3. Who are the target users (personas, skill level)? 4. What are the success criteria? ### Step 2: Run Heuristic Scan (Nielsen's 10) Evaluate the interface against each heuristic: | Heuristic | Check | |-----------|-------| | Visibility of system status | Does the user always know what's happening? | | Match with real world | Does it use familiar language and concepts? | | User control and freedom | Can users undo, go back, escape? | | Consistency and standards | Does it follow platform conventions? | | Error prevention | Are mistakes prevented before they happen? | | Recognition over recall | Is information visible rather than memorized? | | Flexibility and efficiency | Are there shortcuts for expert users? | | Aesthetic and minimalist design | Is every element necessary? | | Error recovery | Are error messages helpful and actionable? | | Help and documentation | Is guidance available when needed? | ### Step 3: Multi-Perspective Analysis #### Usability Perspective - **User flow**: Is the path to completion clear and efficient? - **Information architecture**: Is content organized logically? - **Cognitive load**: Is the interface overwhelming? - **Mental models**: Does it work like users expect? #### Accessibility Perspective (WCAG 2.1 AA) - **Keyboard navigation**: Can everything be done without a mouse? - **Screen reader**: Is the experience equivalent for assistive tech users? - **Color contrast**: Do all text/UI elements meet 4.5:1 ratio? - **Focus management**: Is focus order logical, visible, and never trapped? ```html <!-- Example: Accessible button with proper ARIA --> <button aria-label="Close dialog" aria-describedby="close-hint"> <svg aria-hidden="true"><!-- icon --></svg> </button> <span id="close-hint" class="sr-only">Press Escape to close</span> ``` #### Interaction Design Perspective - **State coverage**: Are all states handled (loading, empty, error, success)? - **Feedback**: Does the user know their action worked? - **Transitions**: Are animations purposeful and under 300ms? - **Progressive disclosure**: Is complexity revealed appropriately? ### Step 4: Prioritize Findings Categorize every finding: | Priority | Criteria | Action | |----------|----------|--------| | **Critical** | Blocks usability or fails WCAG AA | Must fix before release | | **High** | Significantly degrades experience | Fix in current sprint | | **Enhancement** | Improves delight and efficiency | Backlog for next iteration | | **Future** | Long-term improvements | Track in roadmap | ### Step 5: Produce Review Report ```markdown ## UX Review: [Component/Flow Name] ### Summary [2-3 sentence executive summary] ### Critical Issues - [ ] Issue 1: [Description, impact, WCAG criterion if applicable] - [ ] Issue 2: [Description, impact] ### Recommendations by Category #### Usability | Finding | Impact | Recommendation | |---------|--------|----------------| | [Issue] | High/Med/Low | [Fix] | #### Accessibility | Finding | WCAG Criterion | Recommendation | |---------|----------------|----------------| | [Issue] | [2.x.x Level] | [Fix] | #### Interaction Design | Finding | Impact | Recommendation | |---------|--------|----------------| | [Issue] | High/Med/Low | [Fix] | ### Next Steps 1. Create issues for critical findings 2. Add accessibility requirements to acceptance criteria 3. Schedule follow-up review after fixes ``` ## Focus Area Deep Dives Use `--focus` to narrow the review scope: - **`--focus=ux`**: User flow mapping, task efficiency, error recovery, learnability - **`--focus=a11y`**: WCAG 2.1 AA audit, keyboard nav, screen reader, contrast, focus management - **`--focus=interaction`**: State coverage, feedback timing, micro-interactions, animation review ## Best Practices - **Test with real content** — Lorem ipsum hides information architecture problems - **Check all states** — Empty, loading, error, success, and edge-case states - **Verify keyboard flow** — Tab through the entire component without a mouse - **Use browser dev tools** — Lighthouse accessibility audit catches low-hanging fruit - **Prioritize ruthlessly** — A focused list of critical fixes beats a wall of suggestions
Related Skills
test-review
Review test quality and audit test coverage for any module. This skill should be used when reviewing existing tests, auditing test gaps, writing new tests, or when asked to assess test health. It pipelines testing standards into the audit workflow to produce a prioritized gap report. The output is a report, not code — do not write test implementations until the report is reviewed.
requesting-code-review
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements - dispatches superpowers:code-reviewer subagent to review implementation against plan or requirements before proceeding
receiving-code-review
Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation
multi-specialist-review
User-triggered multi-agent code review. Spawns 3-5 parallel specialist sub-agents that read actual source files, runs mechanical citation verification, and synthesizes a single review artifact. Use for PR-level changes, multi-commit ranges, or security-sensitive work where single-turn review is insufficient.
html-seo-review
Audit static HTML files for on-page SEO, content quality, easy-win performance signals, and crawlability. This skill should be used when the user asks to review, audit, or check the SEO of one or more static HTML files — e.g., "review the HTML for SEO issues", "audit this landing page", "check SEO on these pages before I publish". Static HTML only — does not cover Jekyll/Hugo/Astro/Next.js source, off-page factors, or live-rendered Core Web Vitals.
doc-architecture-review
Evaluate documentation information architecture: navigation paths, discoverability, progressive disclosure, cross-linking, and mental model alignment. This skill should be used when restructuring docs, adding new sections, or when users report difficulty finding information.
codex-code-review
Automate code review remediation loops with the codex CLI. Requests reviews from codex, classifies findings by severity (P0-P4), fixes critical issues (P0/P1) through iterative cycles, defers quality improvements to backlog, and escalates after 3 review cycles. Use when working with code that needs structured remediation: 'codex review' in a request triggers this workflow.
ai-tells-review
User-invoked structural review for subtle AI tells in prose artifacts — rhythm patterns, rhetorical reflexes, hedging cadence, performative emphasis, and the structural shapes that mark text as machine-generated even after surface tells are cleaned up. Produces a findings report citing each tell by line with a fix-direction, then offers a rewrite pass. Use on artifacts that matter: public READMEs, shipped documentation, blog posts, anything where prose-as-artifact is the deliverable. Layers on top of ai-tells-scan, which handles the mechanical surface pass; this skill handles the judgment-based structural pass that a regex can't catch. Trigger on "review for AI tells," "does this read AI," "strip the AI smell," "make this less AI," or any similar request whose deliverable is structural prose surgery.
writing-skills
Use when creating new skills, editing existing skills, or verifying skills work before deployment - applies TDD to process documentation by testing with subagents before writing, iterating until bulletproof against rationalization
workflow-security-audit
Comprehensive security assessment and remediation. Use for security reviews, compliance checks, vulnerability assessments.
workflow-performance
Systematic performance analysis and optimization. Use when things are slow, need optimization, or preparing for scale.
workflow-feature
Complete feature development workflow from design to deployment. Use when implementing new features or functionality.