IMPORTANT: This is a real scenario. Choose which existing frontend skill or skills to load from this directory. Inspect the skill folders if needed. User request: "Please review this checkout flow for UX problems, but also flag accessibility and performance issues before we ship." Return exactly three lines: Skills: ...\nOrder: ...\nWhy: ...


adapt
animate
arrange
audit
bolder
clarify
colorize
critique
delight
distill
extract
frontend-design
harden
normalize
onboard
optimize
overdrive
polish
quieter
teach-impeccable
typeset


---
name: audit
description: Run technical quality checks across accessibility, performance, theming, responsive design, and anti-patterns. Generates a scored report with P0-P3 severity ratings and actionable plan. Use when the user wants an accessibility check, performance audit, or technical quality review.
---

## MANDATORY PREPARATION

Invoke /frontend-design — it contains design principles, anti-patterns, and the **Context Gathering Protocol**. Follow the protocol before proceeding — if no design context exists yet, you MUST run /teach-impeccable first.

---

Run systematic **technical** quality checks and generate a comprehensive report. Don't fix issues — document them for other commands to address.

This is a code-level audit, not a design critique. Check what's measurable and verifiable in the implementation.

## Diagnostic Scan

Run comprehensive checks across 5 dimensions. Score each dimension 0-4 using the criteria below.

### 1. Accessibility (A11y)

**Check for**:
- **Contrast issues**: Text contrast ratios < 4.5:1 (or 7:1 for AAA)
- **Missing ARIA**: Interactive elements without proper roles, labels, or states
- **Keyboard navigation**: Missing focus indicators, illogical tab order, keyboard traps
- **Semantic HTML**: Improper heading hierarchy, missing landmarks, divs instead of buttons
- **Alt text**: Missing or poor image descriptions
- **Form issues**: Inputs without labels, poor error messaging, missing required indicators

**Score 0-4**: 0=Inaccessible (fails WCAG A), 1=Major gaps (few ARIA labels, no keyboard nav), 2=Partial (some a11y effort, significant gaps), 3=Good (WCAG AA mostly met, minor gaps), 4=Excellent (WCAG AA fully met, approaches AAA)

### 2. Performance

**Check for**:
- **Layout thrashing**: Reading/writing layout properties in loops
- **Expensive animations**: Animating layout properties (width, height, top, left) instead of transform/opacity
- **Missing optimization**: Images without lazy loading, unoptimized assets, missing will-change
- **Bundle size**: Unnecessary imports, unused dependencies
- **Render performance**: Unnecessary re-renders, missing memoization

**Score 0-4**: 0=Severe issues (layout thrash, unoptimized everything), 1=Major problems (no lazy loading, expensive animations), 2=Partial (some optimization, gaps remain), 3=Good (mostly optimized, minor improvements possible), 4=Excellent (fast, lean, well-optimized)

### 3. Theming

**Check for**:
- **Hard-coded colors**: Colors not using design tokens
- **Broken dark mode**: Missing dark mode variants, poor contrast in dark theme
- **Inconsistent tokens**: Using wrong tokens, mixing token types
- **Theme switching issues**: Values that don't update on theme change

**Score 0-4**: 0=No theming (hard-coded everything), 1=Minimal tokens (mostly hard-coded), 2=Partial (tokens exist but inconsistently used), 3=Good (tokens used, minor hard-coded values), 4=Excellent (full token system, dark mode works perfectly)

### 4. Responsive Design

**Check for**:
- **Fixed widths**: Hard-coded widths that break on mobile
- **Touch targets**: Interactive elements < 44x44px
- **Horizontal scroll**: Content overflow on narrow viewports
- **Text scaling**: Layouts that break when text size increases
- **Missing breakpoints**: No mobile/tablet variants

**Score 0-4**: 0=Desktop-only (breaks on mobile), 1=Major issues (some breakpoints, many failures), 2=Partial (works on mobile, rough edges), 3=Good (responsive, minor touch target or overflow issues), 4=Excellent (fluid, all viewports, proper touch targets)

### 5. Anti-Patterns (CRITICAL)

Check against ALL the **DON'T** guidelines in the frontend-design skill. Look for AI slop tells (AI color palette, gradient text, glassmorphism, hero metrics, card grids, generic fonts) and general design anti-patterns (gray on color, nested cards, bounce easing, redundant copy).

**Score 0-4**: 0=AI slop gallery (5+ tells), 1=Heavy AI aesthetic (3-4 tells), 2=Some tells (1-2 noticeable), 3=Mostly clean (subtle issues only), 4=No AI tells (distinctive, intentional design)

## Generate Report

### Audit Health Score

| # | Dimension | Score | Key Finding |
|---|-----------|-------|-------------|
| 1 | Accessibility | ? | [most critical a11y issue or "--"] |
| 2 | Performance | ? | |
| 3 | Responsive Design | ? | |
| 4 | Theming | ? | |
| 5 | Anti-Patterns | ? | |
| **Total** | | **??/20** | **[Rating band]** |

**Rating bands**: 18-20 Excellent (minor polish), 14-17 Good (address weak dimensions), 10-13 Acceptable (significant work needed), 6-9 Poor (major overhaul), 0-5 Critical (fundamental issues)

### Anti-Patterns Verdict
**Start here.** Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells. Be brutally honest.

### Executive Summary
- Audit Health Score: **??/20** ([rating band])
- Total issues found (count by severity: P0/P1/P2/P3)
- Top 3-5 critical issues
- Recommended next steps

### Detailed Findings by Severity

Tag every issue with **P0-P3 severity**:
- **P0 Blocking**: Prevents task completion — fix immediately
- **P1 Major**: Significant difficulty or WCAG AA violation — fix before release
- **P2 Minor**: Annoyance, workaround exists — fix in next pass
- **P3 Polish**: Nice-to-fix, no real user impact — fix if time permits

For each issue, document:
- **[P?] Issue name**
- **Location**: Component, file, line
- **Category**: Accessibility / Performance / Theming / Responsive / Anti-Pattern
- **Impact**: How it affects users
- **WCAG/Standard**: Which standard it violates (if applicable)
- **Recommendation**: How to fix it
- **Suggested command**: Which command to use (prefer: /animate, /quieter, /optimize, /adapt, /clarify, /distill, /delight, /onboard, /normalize, /audit, /harden, /polish, /extract, /bolder, /arrange, /typeset, /critique, /colorize, /overdrive)

### Patterns & Systemic Issues

Identify recurring problems that indicate systemic gaps rather than one-off mistakes:
- "Hard-coded colors appear in 15+ components, should use design tokens"
- "Touch targets consistently too small (<44px) throughout mobile experience"

### Positive Findings

Note what's working well — good practices to maintain and replicate.

## Recommended Actions

List recommended commands in priority order (P0 first, then P1, then P2):

1. **[P?] `/command-name`** — Brief description (specific context from audit findings)
2. **[P?] `/command-name`** — Brief description (specific context)

**Rules**: Only recommend commands from: /animate, /quieter, /optimize, /adapt, /clarify, /distill, /delight, /onboard, /normalize, /audit, /harden, /polish, /extract, /bolder, /arrange, /typeset, /critique, /colorize, /overdrive. Map findings to the most appropriate command. End with `/polish` as the final step if any fixes were recommended.

After presenting the summary, tell the user:

> You can ask me to run these one at a time, all at once, or in any order you prefer.
>
> Re-run `/audit` after fixes to see your score improve.

**IMPORTANT**: Be thorough but actionable. Too many P3 issues creates noise. Focus on what actually matters.

**NEVER**:
- Report issues without explaining impact (why does this matter?)
- Provide generic recommendations (be specific and actionable)
- Skip positive findings (celebrate what works)
- Forget to prioritize (everything can't be P0)
- Report false positives without verification

Remember: You're a technical quality auditor. Document systematically, prioritize ruthlessly, cite specific code locations, and provide clear paths to improvement.


---
name: critique
description: Evaluate design from a UX perspective, assessing visual hierarchy, information architecture, emotional resonance, cognitive load, and overall quality with quantitative scoring, persona-based testing, and actionable feedback. Use when the user asks to review, critique, evaluate, or give feedback on a design or component.
---

## MANDATORY PREPARATION

Invoke /frontend-design — it contains design principles, anti-patterns, and the **Context Gathering Protocol**. Follow the protocol before proceeding — if no design context exists yet, you MUST run /teach-impeccable first. Additionally gather: what the interface is trying to accomplish.

---

Conduct a holistic design critique, evaluating whether the interface actually works — not just technically, but as a designed experience. Think like a design director giving feedback.

## Phase 1: Design Critique

Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:

### 1. AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)

**This is the most important check.** Does this look like every other AI-generated interface from 2024-2025?

Review the design against ALL the **DON'T** guidelines in the frontend-design skill — they are the fingerprints of AI-generated work. Check for the AI color palette, gradient text, dark mode with glowing accents, glassmorphism, hero metric layouts, identical card grids, generic fonts, and all other tells.

**The test**: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this," would they believe you immediately? If yes, that's the problem.

### 2. Visual Hierarchy
- Does the eye flow to the most important element first?
- Is there a clear primary action? Can you spot it in 2 seconds?
- Do size, color, and position communicate importance correctly?
- Is there visual competition between elements that should have different weights?

### 3. Information Architecture & Cognitive Load
> *Consult [cognitive-load](reference/cognitive-load.md) for the working memory rule and 8-item checklist*
- Is the structure intuitive? Would a new user understand the organization?
- Is related content grouped logically?
- Are there too many choices at once? Count visible options at each decision point — if >4, flag it
- Is the navigation clear and predictable?
- **Progressive disclosure**: Is complexity revealed only when needed, or dumped on the user upfront?
- **Run the 8-item cognitive load checklist** from the reference. Report failure count: 0–1 = low (good), 2–3 = moderate, 4+ = critical.

### 4. Emotional Journey
- What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
- Does it match the brand personality?
- Does it feel trustworthy, approachable, premium, playful — whatever it should feel?
- Would the target user feel "this is for me"?
- **Peak-end rule**: Is the most intense moment positive? Does the experience end well (confirmation, celebration, clear next step)?
- **Emotional valleys**: Check for onboarding frustration, error cliffs, feature discovery gaps, or anxiety spikes at high-stakes moments (payment, delete, commit)
- **Interventions at negative moments**: Are there design interventions where users are likely to feel frustrated or anxious? (progress indicators, reassurance copy, undo options, social proof)

### 5. Discoverability & Affordance
- Are interactive elements obviously interactive?
- Would a user know what to do without instructions?
- Are hover/focus states providing useful feedback?
- Are there hidden features that should be more visible?

### 6. Composition & Balance
- Does the layout feel balanced or uncomfortably weighted?
- Is whitespace used intentionally or just leftover?
- Is there visual rhythm in spacing and repetition?
- Does asymmetry feel designed or accidental?

### 7. Typography as Communication
- Does the type hierarchy clearly signal what to read first, second, third?
- Is body text comfortable to read? (line length, spacing, size)
- Do font choices reinforce the brand/tone?
- Is there enough contrast between heading levels?

### 8. Color with Purpose
- Is color used to communicate, not just decorate?
- Does the palette feel cohesive?
- Are accent colors drawing attention to the right things?
- Does it work for colorblind users? (not just technically — does meaning still come through?)

### 9. States & Edge Cases
- Empty states: Do they guide users toward action, or just say "nothing here"?
- Loading states: Do they reduce perceived wait time?
- Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming?
- Success states: Do they confirm and guide next steps?

### 10. Microcopy & Voice
- Is the writing clear and concise?
- Does it sound like a human (the right human for this brand)?
- Are labels and buttons unambiguous?
- Does error copy help users fix the problem?

## Phase 2: Present Findings

Structure your feedback as a design director would:

### Design Health Score
> *Consult [heuristics-scoring](reference/heuristics-scoring.md)*

Score each of Nielsen's 10 heuristics 0–4. Present as a table:

| # | Heuristic | Score | Key Issue |
|---|-----------|-------|-----------|
| 1 | Visibility of System Status | ? | [specific finding or "—" if solid] |
| 2 | Match System / Real World | ? | |
| 3 | User Control and Freedom | ? | |
| 4 | Consistency and Standards | ? | |
| 5 | Error Prevention | ? | |
| 6 | Recognition Rather Than Recall | ? | |
| 7 | Flexibility and Efficiency | ? | |
| 8 | Aesthetic and Minimalist Design | ? | |
| 9 | Error Recovery | ? | |
| 10 | Help and Documentation | ? | |
| **Total** | | **??/40** | **[Rating band]** |

Be honest with scores. A 4 means genuinely excellent. Most real interfaces score 20–32.

### Anti-Patterns Verdict
**Start here.** Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells from the skill's Anti-Patterns section. Be brutally honest.

### Overall Impression
A brief gut reaction — what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.

### What's Working
Highlight 2–3 things done well. Be specific about why they work.

### Priority Issues
The 3–5 most impactful design problems, ordered by importance.

For each issue, tag with **P0–P3 severity** (consult [heuristics-scoring](reference/heuristics-scoring.md) for severity definitions):
- **[P?] What**: Name the problem clearly
- **Why it matters**: How this hurts users or undermines goals
- **Fix**: What to do about it (be concrete)
- **Suggested command**: Which command could address this (from: /animate, /quieter, /optimize, /adapt, /clarify, /distill, /delight, /onboard, /normalize, /audit, /harden, /polish, /extract, /bolder, /arrange, /typeset, /critique, /colorize, /overdrive)

### Persona Red Flags
> *Consult [personas](reference/personas.md)*

Auto-select 2–3 personas most relevant to this interface type (use the selection table in the reference). If `AGENTS.md` contains a `## Design Context` section from `teach-impeccable`, also generate 1–2 project-specific personas from the audience/brand info.

For each selected persona, walk through the primary user action and list specific red flags found:

**Alex (Power User)**: No keyboard shortcuts detected. Form requires 8 clicks for primary action. Forced modal onboarding. ⚠ High abandonment risk.

**Jordan (First-Timer)**: Icon-only nav in sidebar. Technical jargon in error messages ("404 Not Found"). No visible help. ⚠ Will abandon at step 2.

Be specific — name the exact elements and interactions that fail each persona. Don't write generic persona descriptions; write what broke for them.

### Minor Observations
Quick notes on smaller issues worth addressing.

**Remember**:
- Be direct — vague feedback wastes everyone's time
- Be specific — "the submit button" not "some elements"
- Say what's wrong AND why it matters to users
- Give concrete suggestions, not just "consider exploring..."
- Prioritize ruthlessly — if everything is important, nothing is
- Don't soften criticism — developers need honest feedback to ship great design

## Phase 3: Ask the User

**After presenting findings**, use targeted questions based on what was actually found. ask the user directly to clarify what you cannot infer. These answers will shape the action plan.

Ask questions along these lines (adapt to the specific findings — do NOT ask generic questions):

1. **Priority direction**: Based on the issues found, ask which category matters most to the user right now. For example: "I found problems with visual hierarchy, color usage, and information overload. Which area should we tackle first?" Offer the top 2–3 issue categories as options.

2. **Design intent**: If the critique found a tonal mismatch, ask whether it was intentional. For example: "The interface feels clinical and corporate. Is that the intended tone, or should it feel warmer/bolder/more playful?" Offer 2–3 tonal directions as options based on what would fix the issues found.

3. **Scope**: Ask how much the user wants to take on. For example: "I found N issues. Want to address everything, or focus on the top 3?" Offer scope options like "Top 3 only", "All issues", "Critical issues only".

4. **Constraints** (optional — only ask if relevant): If the findings touch many areas, ask if anything is off-limits. For example: "Should any sections stay as-is?" This prevents the plan from touching things the user considers done.

**Rules for questions**:
- Every question must reference specific findings from Phase 2 — never ask generic "who is your audience?" questions
- Keep it to 2–4 questions maximum — respect the user's time
- Offer concrete options, not open-ended prompts
- If findings are straightforward (e.g., only 1–2 clear issues), skip questions and go directly to Phase 4

## Phase 4: Recommended Actions

**After receiving the user's answers**, present a prioritized action summary reflecting the user's priorities and scope from Phase 3.

### Action Summary

List recommended commands in priority order, based on the user's answers:

1. **`/command-name`** — Brief description of what to fix (specific context from critique findings)
2. **`/command-name`** — Brief description (specific context)
...

**Rules for recommendations**:
- Only recommend commands from: /animate, /quieter, /optimize, /adapt, /clarify, /distill, /delight, /onboard, /normalize, /audit, /harden, /polish, /extract, /bolder, /arrange, /typeset, /critique, /colorize, /overdrive
- Order by the user's stated priorities first, then by impact
- Each item's description should carry enough context that the command knows what to focus on
- Map each Priority Issue to the appropriate command
- Skip commands that would address zero issues
- If the user chose a limited scope, only include items within that scope
- If the user marked areas as off-limits, exclude commands that would touch those areas
- End with `/polish` as the final step if any fixes were recommended

After presenting the summary, tell the user:

> You can ask me to run these one at a time, all at once, or in any order you prefer.
>
> Re-run `/critique` after fixes to see your score improve.


---
name: optimize
description: Diagnoses and fixes UI performance across loading speed, rendering, animations, images, and bundle size. Use when the user mentions slow, laggy, janky, performance, bundle size, load time, or wants a faster, smoother experience.
---

Identify and fix performance issues to create faster, smoother user experiences.

## Assess Performance Issues

Understand current performance and identify problems:

1. **Measure current state**:
   - **Core Web Vitals**: LCP, FID/INP, CLS scores
   - **Load time**: Time to interactive, first contentful paint
   - **Bundle size**: JavaScript, CSS, image sizes
   - **Runtime performance**: Frame rate, memory usage, CPU usage
   - **Network**: Request count, payload sizes, waterfall

2. **Identify bottlenecks**:
   - What's slow? (Initial load? Interactions? Animations?)
   - What's causing it? (Large images? Expensive JavaScript? Layout thrashing?)
   - How bad is it? (Perceivable? Annoying? Blocking?)
   - Who's affected? (All users? Mobile only? Slow connections?)

**CRITICAL**: Measure before and after. Premature optimization wastes time. Optimize what actually matters.

## Optimization Strategy

Create systematic improvement plan:

### Loading Performance

**Optimize Images**:
- Use modern formats (WebP, AVIF)
- Proper sizing (don't load 3000px image for 300px display)
- Lazy loading for below-fold images
- Responsive images (`srcset`, `picture` element)
- Compress images (80-85% quality is usually imperceptible)
- Use CDN for faster delivery

```html
<img
  src="hero.webp"
  srcset="hero-400.webp 400w, hero-800.webp 800w, hero-1200.webp 1200w"
  sizes="(max-width: 400px) 400px, (max-width: 800px) 800px, 1200px"
  loading="lazy"
  alt="Hero image"
/>
```

**Reduce JavaScript Bundle**:
- Code splitting (route-based, component-based)
- Tree shaking (remove unused code)
- Remove unused dependencies
- Lazy load non-critical code
- Use dynamic imports for large components

```javascript
// Lazy load heavy component
const HeavyChart = lazy(() => import('./HeavyChart'));
```

**Optimize CSS**:
- Remove unused CSS
- Critical CSS inline, rest async
- Minimize CSS files
- Use CSS containment for independent regions

**Optimize Fonts**:
- Use `font-display: swap` or `optional`
- Subset fonts (only characters you need)
- Preload critical fonts
- Use system fonts when appropriate
- Limit font weights loaded

```css
@font-face {
  font-family: 'CustomFont';
  src: url('/fonts/custom.woff2') format('woff2');
  font-display: swap; /* Show fallback immediately */
  unicode-range: U+0020-007F; /* Basic Latin only */
}
```

**Optimize Loading Strategy**:
- Critical resources first (async/defer non-critical)
- Preload critical assets
- Prefetch likely next pages
- Service worker for offline/caching
- HTTP/2 or HTTP/3 for multiplexing

### Rendering Performance

**Avoid Layout Thrashing**:
```javascript
// ❌ Bad: Alternating reads and writes (causes reflows)
elements.forEach(el => {
  const height = el.offsetHeight; // Read (forces layout)
  el.style.height = height * 2; // Write
});

// ✅ Good: Batch reads, then batch writes
const heights = elements.map(el => el.offsetHeight); // All reads
elements.forEach((el, i) => {
  el.style.height = heights[i] * 2; // All writes
});
```

**Optimize Rendering**:
- Use CSS `contain` property for independent regions
- Minimize DOM depth (flatter is faster)
- Reduce DOM size (fewer elements)
- Use `content-visibility: auto` for long lists
- Virtual scrolling for very long lists (react-window, react-virtualized)

**Reduce Paint & Composite**:
- Use `transform` and `opacity` for animations (GPU-accelerated)
- Avoid animating layout properties (width, height, top, left)
- Use `will-change` sparingly for known expensive operations
- Minimize paint areas (smaller is faster)

### Animation Performance

**GPU Acceleration**:
```css
/* ✅ GPU-accelerated (fast) */
.animated {
  transform: translateX(100px);
  opacity: 0.5;
}

/* ❌ CPU-bound (slow) */
.animated {
  left: 100px;
  width: 300px;
}
```

**Smooth 60fps**:
- Target 16ms per frame (60fps)
- Use `requestAnimationFrame` for JS animations
- Debounce/throttle scroll handlers
- Use CSS animations when possible
- Avoid long-running JavaScript during animations

**Intersection Observer**:
```javascript
// Efficiently detect when elements enter viewport
const observer = new IntersectionObserver((entries) => {
  entries.forEach(entry => {
    if (entry.isIntersecting) {
      // Element is visible, lazy load or animate
    }
  });
});
```

### React/Framework Optimization

**React-specific**:
- Use `memo()` for expensive components
- `useMemo()` and `useCallback()` for expensive computations
- Virtualize long lists
- Code split routes
- Avoid inline function creation in render
- Use React DevTools Profiler

**Framework-agnostic**:
- Minimize re-renders
- Debounce expensive operations
- Memoize computed values
- Lazy load routes and components

### Network Optimization

**Reduce Requests**:
- Combine small files
- Use SVG sprites for icons
- Inline small critical assets
- Remove unused third-party scripts

**Optimize APIs**:
- Use pagination (don't load everything)
- GraphQL to request only needed fields
- Response compression (gzip, brotli)
- HTTP caching headers
- CDN for static assets

**Optimize for Slow Connections**:
- Adaptive loading based on connection (navigator.connection)
- Optimistic UI updates
- Request prioritization
- Progressive enhancement

## Core Web Vitals Optimization

### Largest Contentful Paint (LCP < 2.5s)
- Optimize hero images
- Inline critical CSS
- Preload key resources
- Use CDN
- Server-side rendering

### First Input Delay (FID < 100ms) / INP (< 200ms)
- Break up long tasks
- Defer non-critical JavaScript
- Use web workers for heavy computation
- Reduce JavaScript execution time

### Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS < 0.1)
- Set dimensions on images and videos
- Don't inject content above existing content
- Use `aspect-ratio` CSS property
- Reserve space for ads/embeds
- Avoid animations that cause layout shifts

```css
/* Reserve space for image */
.image-container {
  aspect-ratio: 16 / 9;
}
```

## Performance Monitoring

**Tools to use**:
- Chrome DevTools (Lighthouse, Performance panel)
- WebPageTest
- Core Web Vitals (Chrome UX Report)
- Bundle analyzers (webpack-bundle-analyzer)
- Performance monitoring (Sentry, DataDog, New Relic)

**Key metrics**:
- LCP, FID/INP, CLS (Core Web Vitals)
- Time to Interactive (TTI)
- First Contentful Paint (FCP)
- Total Blocking Time (TBT)
- Bundle size
- Request count

**IMPORTANT**: Measure on real devices with real network conditions. Desktop Chrome with fast connection isn't representative.

**NEVER**:
- Optimize without measuring (premature optimization)
- Sacrifice accessibility for performance
- Break functionality while optimizing
- Use `will-change` everywhere (creates new layers, uses memory)
- Lazy load above-fold content
- Optimize micro-optimizations while ignoring major issues (optimize the biggest bottleneck first)
- Forget about mobile performance (often slower devices, slower connections)

## Verify Improvements

Test that optimizations worked:

- **Before/after metrics**: Compare Lighthouse scores
- **Real user monitoring**: Track improvements for real users
- **Different devices**: Test on low-end Android, not just flagship iPhone
- **Slow connections**: Throttle to 3G, test experience
- **No regressions**: Ensure functionality still works
- **User perception**: Does it *feel* faster?

Remember: Performance is a feature. Fast experiences feel more responsive, more polished, more professional. Optimize systematically, measure ruthlessly, and prioritize user-perceived performance.


must-3be555fd-0

must-3be555fd-1

Run systematic **technical** quality checks and generate a comprehensive report. Don't fix issues — document them for other commands to address.

- **Missing ARIA**: Interactive elements without proper roles, labels, or states

- **Keyboard navigation**: Missing focus indicators, illogical tab order, keyboard traps

- **Semantic HTML**: Improper heading hierarchy, missing landmarks, divs instead of buttons

- **Alt text**: Missing or poor image descriptions

- **Form issues**: Inputs without labels, poor error messaging, missing required indicators

- **Missing optimization**: Images without lazy loading, unoptimized assets, missing will-change

- **Render performance**: Unnecessary re-renders, missing memoization

- **Broken dark mode**: Missing dark mode variants, poor contrast in dark theme

must-3be555fd-2

- **Theme switching issues**: Values that don't update on theme change

- **Missing breakpoints**: No mobile/tablet variants

must-3be555fd-3

Check against ALL the **DON'T** guidelines in the frontend-design skill. Look for AI slop tells (AI color palette, gradient text, glassmorphism, hero metrics, card grids, generic fonts) and general design anti-patterns (gray on color, nested cards, bounce easing, redundant copy).

must-3be555fd-4

- **Suggested command**: Which command to use (prefer: /animate, /quieter, /optimize, /adapt, /clarify, /distill, /delight, /onboard, /normalize, /audit, /harden, /polish, /extract, /bolder, /arrange, /typeset, /critique, /colorize, /overdrive)

must-3be555fd-5

- "Hard-coded colors appear in 15+ components, should use design tokens"

must-3be555fd-6

> You can ask me to run these one at a time, all at once, or in any order you prefer.

must-dc61bc74-0

Invoke /frontend-design — it contains design principles, anti-patterns, and the **Context Gathering Protocol**. Follow the protocol before proceeding — if no design context exists yet, you MUST run /teach-impeccable first. Additionally gather: what the interface is trying to accomplish.

must-dc61bc74-1

Review the design against ALL the **DON'T** guidelines in the frontend-design skill — they are the fingerprints of AI-generated work. Check for the AI color palette, gradient text, dark mode with glowing accents, glassmorphism, hero metric layouts, identical card grids, generic fonts, and all other tells.

must-dc61bc74-2

- Is there visual competition between elements that should have different weights?

reference/cognitive-load.md

reference/cognitive-load.md

- **Run the 8-item cognitive load checklist** from the reference. Report failure count: 0–1 = low (good), 2–3 = moderate, 4+ = critical.

must-dc61bc74-3

- Does it feel trustworthy, approachable, premium, playful — whatever it should feel?

- **Emotional valleys**: Check for onboarding frustration, error cliffs, feature discovery gaps, or anxiety spikes at high-stakes moments (payment, delete, commit)

must-dc61bc74-4

- Are there hidden features that should be more visible?

- Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming?

- Does error copy help users fix the problem?

reference/heuristics-scoring.md

reference/heuristics-scoring.md

| 5 | Error Prevention | ? | |

| 9 | Error Recovery | ? | |

reference/heuristics-scoring.md

reference/heuristics-scoring.md

reference/personas.md

reference/personas.md

AGENTS.md

AGENTS.md

**Jordan (First-Timer)**: Icon-only nav in sidebar. Technical jargon in error messages ("404 Not Found"). No visible help. ⚠ Will abandon at step 2.

must-dc61bc74-5

Be specific — name the exact elements and interactions that fail each persona. Don't write generic persona descriptions; write what broke for them.

must-dc61bc74-6

- Don't soften criticism — developers need honest feedback to ship great design

must-dc61bc74-7

Ask questions along these lines (adapt to the specific findings — do NOT ask generic questions):

must-dc61bc74-8

1. **Priority direction**: Based on the issues found, ask which category matters most to the user right now. For example: "I found problems with visual hierarchy, color usage, and information overload. Which area should we tackle first?" Offer the top 2–3 issue categories as options.

must-dc61bc74-9

2. **Design intent**: If the critique found a tonal mismatch, ask whether it was intentional. For example: "The interface feels clinical and corporate. Is that the intended tone, or should it feel warmer/bolder/more playful?" Offer 2–3 tonal directions as options based on what would fix the issues found.

must-dc61bc74-10

4. **Constraints** (optional — only ask if relevant): If the findings touch many areas, ask if anything is off-limits. For example: "Should any sections stay as-is?" This prevents the plan from touching things the user considers done.

must-dc61bc74-11

- Every question must reference specific findings from Phase 2 — never ask generic "who is your audience?" questions

must-dc61bc74-12

- Each item's description should carry enough context that the command knows what to focus on

must-dc61bc74-13

must-3b2e3d24-0

- Proper sizing (don't load 3000px image for 300px display)

must-3b2e3d24-1

**Avoid Layout Thrashing**:

must-3b2e3d24-2

- Avoid animating layout properties (width, height, top, left)

must-3b2e3d24-3

- Avoid long-running JavaScript during animations

must-3b2e3d24-4

- Avoid inline function creation in render

must-3b2e3d24-5

- Use pagination (don't load everything)

must-3b2e3d24-6

- Don't inject content above existing content

must-3b2e3d24-7

- Avoid animations that cause layout shifts


Skills: audit, critique, optimize
Order: critique → audit → optimize
Why: Critique finds design-UX issues for checkout flow experience; audit ensures accessibility standards, flags key gaps; optimize improves detected performance bottlenecks.