agentsclimarketplace

Ux design discipline

Skill volodchenkov/claude-sdlc-agents/skills/ux-design-discipline

Use this skill when working as the designer — producing UX flow + Figma frame inventory for SPEC implementation, evaluating accessibility (WCAG 2.1 AA), applying Nielsen usability heuristics, choosing platform conventions (Material 3 web / iOS HIG / desktop). Also covers UX-Review mode — verifying frontend implementation against design.From its SKILL.md

Install
npx -y skills add volodchenkov/claude-sdlc-agents --skill ux-design-discipline

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 2 stars2 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

SKILL.md

8.8 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

UX Design Discipline

This skill encodes the design lens for the designer agent. Two modes:

  • Mode A: Design brief — produces a Design sub-issue with UX flow + Figma frame inventory before frontend coders start.
  • Mode B: UX review — after frontend ships, verifies implementation matches design intent.

Inspired by:

  • Nielsen 10 Usability Heuristics (Jakob Nielsen) — universal evaluation framework
  • WCAG 2.1 Level AA (W3C) — accessibility compliance
  • Material Design 3 (Google) — for web / Android components
  • iOS Human Interface Guidelines (Apple) — for iOS-flavoured UIs
  • Inclusive Design Principles (Microsoft / W3C) — beyond a11y to broader inclusion

Nielsen 10 Usability Heuristics — apply during Design brief AND UX review

Walk through these 10 for every screen / flow:

  1. Visibility of system status — user always knows what's happening (loading spinner, success toast, progress bar).
  2. Match between system and the real world — labels in user's language, not jargon. "Order delivered" not "txn_status_5".
  3. User control and freedom — undo / cancel for destructive actions; clear exit from any state.
  4. Consistency and standards — same word for same concept across the product. Match platform conventions (back button placement, primary action style).
  5. Error prevention — confirm destructive actions; constrain inputs (date picker rather than free text); inline validation.
  6. Recognition rather than recall — visible options / autocomplete instead of asking user to remember.
  7. Flexibility and efficiency of use — accelerators for power users (keyboard shortcuts, bulk operations) without burdening newcomers.
  8. Aesthetic and minimalist design — every UI element earns its place; remove what's not adding info.
  9. Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors — error messages explain what went wrong + suggest fix.
  10. Help and documentation — when needed, contextual help, not a separate manual lost from the flow.

For Design brief: every screen / state in the design must answer: which heuristics are addressed? For UX review: every heuristic violated in implementation = a finding.


State coverage — every screen has 8 states minimum

Designs that only show "happy path" cause downstream pain. For every page / component, design and document:

  1. Empty — no data yet (first-time user, empty list, no results)
  2. Loading — async data not yet arrived (skeleton, spinner, progress)
  3. Partial — some data, more loading (e.g. above-fold loaded, infinite scroll spinner below)
  4. Success / populated — normal use
  5. Error — API failure, network down, validation failure
  6. Permission denied — user without access (forbidden, not just hidden)
  7. Edge / extreme — very long names, very many items, missing optional fields
  8. Disabled / read-only — when interaction not currently allowed (pre-launch, locked due to status)

In the Design brief, list which states each component supports + Figma frame for each.


Accessibility (WCAG 2.1 Level AA) — overlap with the ui-tester but the designer owns the intent

The designer's responsibility: design must be a11y-by-default. The ui-tester verifies; the designer prevents.

Color and contrast

  • Text contrast ≥ 4.5:1 (normal) / ≥ 3:1 (large 18pt+ or 14pt+ bold). Decorative graphics excepted.
  • Don't use color alone to convey meaning — pair with icon, text, or pattern.
  • Test designs at 200% browser zoom — does it still work without horizontal scroll?

Touch targets

  • Minimum 44×44 px (iOS HIG) / 48×48 dp (Material 3) for touch targets.
  • Spacing between adjacent targets — at least 8 px so finger doesn't hit wrong one.

Typography

  • Body text minimum 16 px (12 pt) on web / 14 pt on iOS.
  • Line height ≥ 1.5 for body. Letter spacing default unless specific need.

Focus indicators

  • Every interactive element shows visible focus state when keyboard-navigated. Default browser ring acceptable; custom ring also OK if visible (≥ 2 px, ≥ 3:1 contrast).
  • DON'T outline: none without replacement.

Icons + labels

  • Icon-only buttons need aria-label. Avoid icon-only buttons in primary flow (recognition > recall).
  • Use clear, action-oriented labels ("Save" not "Submit", "Cancel order" not "X").

Forms

  • Every input has a visible <label>. Placeholder is NOT a label — it disappears on input.
  • Error messages near the field, in plain language, with how to fix.

Motion

  • Don't depend on animation for understanding. Provide alternatives for prefers-reduced-motion.
  • Avoid auto-playing video / aggressive parallax.

For full reference: https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/quickref/


Platform conventions — derived from the project, not from this skill

Projects ship multiple frontends with different conventions. $KB_DIR/kb/frontends.md is authoritative — it declares, per frontend surface: chosen design system, UI library, responsive strategy (mobile-first / desktop-first), breakpoints, touch-target size, navigation shape. Read it before making any convention decision.

Surface types you'll encounter (design-thinking framing only — NOT defaults; the project's frontends.md overrides everything below):

  • Customer-facing storefront — usually mobile-first, standard web nav, accessible touch targets. Design system / breakpoints / brand tokens: from frontends.md.
  • Admin / POS / internal panel — usually desktop-first (power users, dense info, keyboard shortcuts), tables & forms over marketing flair. UI library: from frontends.md.
  • iOS / Android native — platform HIG (Apple / Material) is the source of truth, not this skill.

If frontends.md does not answer a convention question, ask the initiator or escalate — do not fall back to defaults from prior projects (per agent-base §4b.1).


Mode A: Design brief — what to produce

For every Plane task that has a frontend impact, the designer creates a Design sub-issue with:

  1. Figma link(s) — anchored to specific frame (?node-id=... URL form)
  2. UX flow — 5–10 lines, step-by-step user journey
  3. Screen / state list — table: screen name × states (8-state matrix)
  4. Component spec (when introducing a new component) — variants, props if known, behaviour states
  5. Constraints — brand tokens, accessibility callouts, motion limits
  6. Open questions — for the initiator / system-analyst / architect (e.g. "should empty state show CTA to create?")

Don't include implementation details (Vue 3 vs Vue 2, Pinia vs Vuex). That's coder territory.


Mode B: UX review — what to check after frontend ships

Triggered after Frontend CHANGES posted. The designer re-runs through the design to verify:

  1. All 8 states present — empty / loading / partial / success / error / permission / edge / disabled
  2. Nielsen 10 — each heuristic considered; flag violations
  3. WCAG 2.1 AA quick pass — contrast, focus, touch targets, alt text (rough check; the ui-tester does the deep audit)
  4. Pixel-vs-Figma — not pixel-perfect, but functional and structural match (heading hierarchy, primary action prominent, layout responsive)
  5. Brand tokens used (colors, spacing, typography) — not hardcoded values
  6. Motion / micro-interactions — present, accessible, not distracting

Output: review comment in Frontend sub-issue with severity-classified findings (blocker / major / minor) and suggested fix.


Anti-patterns

  • "Just use Material" — convention chosen without thought to brand or context (POS user vs storefront customer have different needs)
  • Designs that show only happy path — leads to ad-hoc empty / loading / error states implemented without thought
  • "Accessibility is QA's job" — wrong; designer prevents, QA verifies
  • Pixel-perfect obsession — implementation will diverge by a few px; that's fine. What matters is structure, hierarchy, behaviour.
  • "Designer doesn't need to write" — Figma alone isn't documentation; the brief explains the why behind the frames

When in doubt

  • Start with REQUIREMENTS Stakeholder Requirements (section 3) — design serves them, not aesthetic preference.
  • Start with SPEC §4 Frontend Behaviour — that's the contract; don't contradict it.
  • For accessibility unsure? Consult the WCAG 2.1 quickref linked above.
  • For component patterns unsure? Look at existing project patterns; don't introduce a new visual language without explicit need.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 628,853. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.