design-critique
Get structured design feedback on usability, hierarchy, and consistency. Trigger with "review this design", "critique this mockup", "what do you think of this screen?", or when sharing a Figma link or screenshot for feedback at any stage from exploration to final polish.
60
70%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./design/skills/design-critique/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
89%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a strong skill description with excellent trigger term coverage and clear 'when to use' guidance. The main weakness is that the 'what' portion could be more specific about the concrete actions performed (e.g., does it produce a checklist, annotate issues, suggest alternatives?). Overall it would perform well in a multi-skill selection scenario.
Suggestions
Expand the capability description with more concrete actions, e.g., 'Provides structured design feedback covering usability issues, visual hierarchy problems, and consistency gaps, with actionable improvement suggestions.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | It names the domain (design feedback) and mentions specific aspects like 'usability, hierarchy, and consistency,' but doesn't list multiple concrete actions beyond 'get structured design feedback.' It could be more specific about what the feedback entails (e.g., annotating issues, suggesting improvements, scoring accessibility). | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (structured design feedback on usability, hierarchy, and consistency) and 'when' (explicit trigger phrases and contexts like sharing a Figma link or screenshot at any stage from exploration to final polish). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger phrases: 'review this design', 'critique this mockup', 'what do you think of this screen?', 'Figma link', 'screenshot for feedback.' These are phrases users would naturally say when seeking design feedback. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description carves out a clear niche around design critique/feedback with distinct triggers like 'mockup', 'Figma link', 'screen', and specific design aspects. This is unlikely to conflict with other skills like general code review or document analysis. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
50%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides a solid structural framework for design critiques with a useful output template and multi-dimensional evaluation criteria. However, it lacks concrete examples of completed critiques, includes some redundant guidance that Claude already knows (general feedback principles), and has an implicit rather than explicit workflow. The skill would benefit from trimming known-good-practice advice and adding a concrete before/after example.
Suggestions
Add a concrete example of a completed design critique (even a brief one) showing the output template filled in with realistic content, to make the skill more actionable.
Remove or significantly trim the 'How to Give Feedback' section — Claude already knows general feedback principles like 'be specific' and 'explain why'; instead, encode these as brief inline reminders within the output template.
Add an explicit workflow sequence: 1) Confirm input type and retrieve design, 2) Confirm context/stage with user if missing, 3) Apply framework, 4) Generate structured output — this would add a validation checkpoint before proceeding.
Consolidate the 'Tips' section into 'What I Need From You' since they largely overlap, reducing redundancy.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is moderately efficient but includes some unnecessary verbosity. The 'How to Give Feedback' section explains general feedback principles Claude already knows (be specific, explain why, suggest alternatives). The 'Tips' section at the end largely repeats information from 'What I Need From You'. The critique framework dimensions are reasonable but could be tighter. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides a clear output template and structured critique framework, which is good. However, it lacks concrete examples of actual critiques — there's no example input/output showing what a completed critique looks like with real design feedback. The guidance is more of a checklist than executable instructions, and the Figma integration instructions are vague ('pull the design from Figma'). | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The workflow is implicit rather than explicit: receive design → gather context → apply framework → produce output. The steps for handling different input types (Figma URL vs file vs description) are mentioned but not clearly sequenced. There's no validation checkpoint — e.g., confirming context/stage with the user before proceeding with the critique. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill references CONNECTORS.md appropriately, but the content is somewhat monolithic — the full critique framework, output template, feedback guidelines, and tips are all inline. The critique framework details and the output template could potentially be split into referenced files. However, for a skill of this length (~100 lines), inline content is borderline acceptable. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins
- Commit
3bf5929
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
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.