CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

wireframing

Low/high fidelity wireframes, user flows, information architecture, prototyping techniques, and design iteration processes

Quality

56%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/luxor-design-toolkit/skills/wireframing/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

31%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The skill body is an encyclopedic UX-design reference: virtually all of the conceptual content (reading patterns, flowchart symbols, navigation patterns, accessibility basics) is knowledge Claude already has, and the 15 inlined examples and tool catalogs should live in separate reference files. A concise core workflow for actually producing a wireframe, with examples split into a referenced file, would cut token cost by an order of magnitude while improving usefulness.

Suggestions

Cut the conceptual textbook material (Core Concepts, Information Architecture theory, Best Practices explanations of known ideas like F/Z patterns and button types) — Claude already knows these; keep only domain-specific conventions or opinions.

Move the 15 wireframe examples and the tool catalog into references/ files (e.g. references/examples.md, references/tools.md) and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with clearly signaled one-level-deep links.

Replace the descriptive iteration theory with an operational, step-by-step workflow for producing a wireframe from a request — including an explicit validation checkpoint (e.g. confirm the target platform, fidelity level, and which screens/flows are needed before drawing).

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~2000-line body is a UX textbook that extensively explains concepts Claude already knows — card sorting types, F/Z reading patterns, flowchart symbols, 12-column grids, primary/secondary/tertiary buttons, modal best practices, hamburger vs tab-bar navigation — plus padded tool catalogs with pricing and learning curves for Figma, Sketch, Balsamiq, etc. This squarely matches anchor 1 (severely verbose; extensively explains known concepts; heavily padded) rather than anchor 2's 'several unnecessary explanations'.

1 / 5

Actionability

There is genuinely concrete material — 15 detailed ASCII wireframe templates with numbered annotations, poor-vs-good annotation examples, and a numbered iteration cycle — but the bulk is descriptive reference ('Characteristics:', 'Advantages:', tool comparisons) rather than executable instruction for producing a wireframe. This fits anchor 3 (some concrete guidance but incomplete, missing key operational detail); the templates keep it above anchor 2, but the absence of a do-this-then-that production workflow keeps it below anchor 4.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 'Iteration Process' section lists a clear 7-step cycle (create → internal review → stakeholder review → user testing → synthesis → refinement → repeat) with feedback-loop guidance, so a sequence is present. However, checkpoints are implicit (review/testing are described conceptually, not as validation gates on output) and there is no error-recovery or verification procedure, matching anchor 3 (steps listed, checkpoints missing or implicit) rather than anchor 4.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

There are no bundle files at all (references/, scripts/, assets/ are absent) and everything — the tool catalog, the 15 full examples, the IA/user-flow theory — is inlined in a single monolithic 2000-line SKILL.md. This matches anchor 2's 'content that clearly belongs in separate files is inlined'; the section headers and TOC provide some structure, but with zero external references and no disclosure mechanism it does not reach anchor 3.

2 / 5

Total

9

/

20

Passed

Description

66%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description clearly names a specific design domain with several concrete capability areas and natural trigger terms, but it reads as a topic list without any explicit 'when to use' guidance, which limits its triggering reliability. Adding a 'Use when...' clause and common synonyms (mockups, lo-fi, sketches) would make it substantially stronger.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user asks for wireframes, mockups, user flows, sitemaps, screen designs, or low-fidelity prototypes of an interface.'

Convert the noun-phrase list into concrete actions in third person, e.g. 'Creates low/high fidelity wireframes, maps user flows and sitemaps, and plans design iteration.'

Include common synonyms users actually say — 'mockups', 'lo-fi sketches', 'screen flows', 'UX layout' — to broaden trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists several concrete capabilities — "Low/high fidelity wireframes, user flows, information architecture, prototyping techniques, and design iteration processes" — covering the domain comprehensively, though phrased as noun-phrase topics rather than actions (no verbs like 'create' or 'design'). It fits anchor 4 (several specific items, minor gaps) better than anchor 3 (only 1-2 actions) and falls short of anchor 5's action-oriented comprehensiveness.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (wireframes, user flows, IA, prototyping, iteration) but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. This matches anchor 3 exactly: clear 'what', 'when' absent.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"wireframes", "user flows", "information architecture", and "prototyping" are natural phrases users would say when needing this skill. Common synonyms and variations are missing — "mockups", "lo-fi/hi-fi", "sketches", "UX" — matching anchor 4 (good coverage, a few natural terms missing) rather than anchor 5 (comprehensive synonyms/extensions).

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Wireframing, user flows, and information architecture form a fairly distinct design niche, though "prototyping techniques" and "design iteration processes" could overlap with general UI-design or prototyping skills. This fits anchor 4 (mostly distinct, minor overlap risk with closely related skills); not anchor 5 since some terms are broad.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (2001 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository

manutej/luxor-claude-marketplace

Path

plugins/luxor-design-toolkit/skills/wireframing/SKILL.md

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.