CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

ux-writing

UX writing and document accessibility standards for technical deliverables. Use when the user asks to 'improve readability', 'fix information hierarchy', 'reduce cognitive load', 'write microcopy', 'check readability score', or mentions 'UX writing', 'scanability', 'Flesch-Kincaid', 'escritura UX', 'legibilidad', 'cognitive load'. [EXPLICIT]

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

UX Writing: Information Design & Cognitive Accessibility Standards

Generic, brand-neutral engineering capability; deep, sourced playbooks live in references/ and knowledge/. [DOC]

Generic, brand-neutral engineering capability; sourced playbooks in references//knowledge/. [DOC]

TL;DR

Ensures deliverables are business-readable, scannable, and cognitively accessible. Provides 5 standards: information hierarchy, cognitive load reduction, scannability, microcopy, and readability heuristics. Spanish-first bilingual support [EXPLICIT]

When to Use

  • Auditing deliverable readability before stakeholder presentation
  • Improving information hierarchy in executive or technical documents
  • Reducing cognitive load in complex multi-section reports
  • Writing or reviewing microcopy (CTAs, error messages, tooltips)
  • Checking readability scores and bilingual consistency

When NOT to Use

  • Technical accuracy validation → domain expert responsibility
  • Full document rewriting → content creation, not UX audit
  • Visual design and branding → html-brand
  • End-user advocacy and adoption risk → user-representative

Sub-capabilities (resource map)

Deep, evidence-tagged playbooks — open the one the task needs (ICM Layer 3, on-demand). [INFERENCE]

Reference
references/full-playbook.md
references/knowledge-graph.mmd
references/state-of-the-art.md
references/ux-writing-patterns.md

Procedure

  1. Resolve the sub-capability; open the matching references/ playbook. [EXPLICIT]
  2. Apply its decision tables; pick the strategy explicitly. [EXPLICIT]
  3. Validate against the Quality Criteria and tag every claim. [EXPLICIT]

Quality Criteria

  • Sub-capability resolved to one playbook. [INFERENCE]
  • Claims evidence-tagged. [EXPLICIT]

Contract

  • Aceptación: capability resolved to its reference playbook, applied, validated, evidence-tagged. [EXPLICIT]
  • Límites: scoped to this capability; deep procedure in references/. [EXPLICIT]
  • Casos borde: Scenario Response --- --- No existing content to audit Start with competitor/industry benchmark analysis. Create content style guide from scratch with stakeholder w. [EXPLICIT]
  • Supuestos: · Assumes business-literate audience (understands domain, may not understand technical details) · Assumes digital-first format; print/PDF requires adaptation for scannability · Ass. [SUPUESTO]
  • Trade-off: Dimension Option A Option B Decision Rule ----------- ---------- ---------- --------------- Completeness vs readability All details in one doc Summary + appendix. [EXPLICIT]

Packet

Capas del packet, cargables bajo demanda (disciplina ICM: una capa por vez, nunca todas juntas): references/ guías de profundidad (cargar UNA por etapa) · knowledge/ cuerpo de conocimiento · prompts/ prompts listos · examples/ salida de ejemplo · agents/ subagentes del packet · assets/ recursos estáticos.

Repository
JaviMontano/claude-plugins
Last updated
First committed

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.