Files
pbakaus_impeccable/source/commands/review.md
T
Paul BakausandClaude Opus 4.5 0b9c1846a6 Add teach-impeccable and review commands, dynamic placeholders
New commands:
- /teach-impeccable: One-time setup that gathers UX-focused design
  context (explores codebase first, then asks targeted questions)
- /review: UX design review evaluating hierarchy, clarity, emotional
  resonance (complements technical /audit)

Build system improvements:
- Dynamic {{model}}, {{ask_instruction}}, {{config_file}} placeholders
  per provider (Claude/Gemini/GPT/the model)
- context: fork support for Claude Code sub-agents (audit, extract)
- Skill reference auto-added to design commands

Skill refinements:
- Merged Design Thinking and Context Awareness sections
- Removed redundant patterns and technical questions
- More direct feedback guidance (radical candor)

Website updates:
- 17 commands (was 16)
- Review demo showing UX issues (HIERARCHY, NO PRIMARY, DEAD END)
- teach-impeccable in System group of periodic table

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-01-07 16:56:08 -08:00

4.2 KiB

name, description, context, args
name description context args
review Evaluate design effectiveness from a UX perspective. Assesses visual hierarchy, information architecture, emotional resonance, and overall design quality with actionable feedback. fork
name description required
area The feature or area to review (optional) false

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

Apply the frontend-design skill for design principles, if not already in context.

Design Review

Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:

1. 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?

2. Information Architecture

  • Is the structure intuitive? Would a new user understand the organization?
  • Is related content grouped logically?
  • Are there too many choices at once? (cognitive overload)
  • Is the navigation clear and predictable?

3. Emotional Resonance

  • 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"?

4. 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?

5. 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?

6. 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?

7. 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?)

8. 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?

9. 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?

Generate Review Report

Structure your feedback as a design director would:

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:

  • What: Name the problem clearly
  • Why it matters: How this hurts users or undermines goals
  • Fix: What to do about it (be concrete)
  • Command: Which command to use (/polish, /simplify, /bolder, /quieter, etc.)

Minor Observations

Quick notes on smaller issues worth addressing.

Questions to Consider

Provocative questions that might unlock better solutions:

  • "What if the primary action were more prominent?"
  • "Does this need to feel this complex?"
  • "What would a confident version of this look like?"

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