本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

review-web-design

Review web design for layout quality, typography, colour usage, spacing, responsive behaviour, brand consistency, and visual hierarchy. Covers design principles evaluation and improvement recommendations. Use when reviewing a design mockup before development, assessing an implemented site for design quality, providing feedback during a design review session, evaluating brand consistency, or checking responsive behaviour across breakpoints.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md10.4 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Review Web Design

Evaluate a web design for visual quality, consistency, and effectiveness across devices.

When to Use

  • Reviewing a design mockup or prototype before development
  • Assessing an implemented website or web application for design quality
  • Providing feedback on visual design during a design review session
  • Evaluating brand consistency across multiple pages or sections
  • Checking responsive design behaviour across breakpoints

Inputs

  • Required: Design to review (URL, mockup files, screenshots, or source code)
  • Optional: Brand guidelines or design system documentation
  • Optional: Target audience description
  • Optional: Reference designs or competitor examples
  • Optional: Specific areas of concern

Procedure

Step 1: Assess Visual Hierarchy

Visual hierarchy guides the user's eye through content in order of importance.

  • Clear focal point: Is there an obvious entry point on each page/screen?
  • Heading hierarchy: Do headings descend logically (H1 → H2 → H3)?
  • Size contrast: Are important elements larger than supporting elements?
  • Colour contrast: Are CTAs and key actions visually prominent?
  • Whitespace: Does spacing separate logical groups effectively?
  • Reading flow: Does the layout follow a natural reading pattern (F-pattern, Z-pattern)?
## Visual Hierarchy Assessment
| Page/Section | Focal Point | Hierarchy Clear? | Issues |
|-------------|-------------|-----------------|--------|
| Homepage | Hero section CTA | Yes | Secondary CTA competes with primary |
| Product page | Product image | Mostly | Price not prominent enough |
| Contact form | Submit button | No | Form title same size as body text |

Expected: Each major page/section assessed for clear visual hierarchy. On failure: If mockups are unavailable, assess from live code using browser dev tools.

Step 2: Evaluate Typography

  • Font selection: Are fonts appropriate for the brand and content type?
  • Font pairing: Do heading and body fonts complement each other (max 2-3 families)?
  • Type scale: Is there a consistent scale (e.g., 1.25 major second, 1.333 perfect fourth)?
  • Line height: Body text has 1.4-1.6 line height; headings have 1.1-1.3
  • Line length: Body text line length is 45-75 characters (optimal ~66)
  • Font weight: Weight variations used consistently to indicate hierarchy
  • Font size: Base font size is at least 16px for body text
/* Example well-structured type scale (1.25 ratio) */
:root {
  --text-xs: 0.64rem;    /* 10.24px */
  --text-sm: 0.8rem;     /* 12.8px */
  --text-base: 1rem;     /* 16px */
  --text-lg: 1.25rem;    /* 20px */
  --text-xl: 1.563rem;   /* 25px */
  --text-2xl: 1.953rem;  /* 31.25px */
  --text-3xl: 2.441rem;  /* 39.06px */
}

Expected: Typography assessed for consistency, readability, and hierarchy. On failure: If the design uses more than 3 font families, recommend consolidation.

Step 3: Review Colour Usage

  • Palette coherence: Is the colour palette intentional and limited (typically 3-5 colours + neutrals)?
  • Brand alignment: Do colours match brand guidelines?
  • Contrast ratios: Text meets WCAG AA (4.5:1 for normal text, 3:1 for large text)
  • Semantic colour: Are colours used consistently for meaning (red=error, green=success)?
  • Colour blindness: Is information conveyed by more than colour alone?
  • Dark/light mode: If supported, both modes maintain readability and brand consistency
## Colour Assessment
| Usage | Colour | Contrast Ratio | WCAG AA | Notes |
|-------|--------|----------------|---------|-------|
| Body text on white | #333333 | 12.6:1 | Pass | Good |
| Link text on white | #2563eb | 5.2:1 | Pass | Good |
| Muted text on light gray | #9ca3af on #f3f4f6 | 2.1:1 | FAIL | Increase contrast |
| CTA button text | #ffffff on #22c55e | 3.1:1 | FAIL for small text | Use darker green or larger text |

Expected: Colour palette reviewed for coherence, accessibility, and semantic consistency. On failure: Use a contrast checker tool (WebAIM) to verify exact ratios.

Step 4: Assess Layout and Spacing

  • Grid system: Is a consistent grid used (12-column, auto-layout, or custom)?
  • Spacing scale: Is spacing systematic (4px/8px base, or Tailwind-like scale)?
  • Alignment: Are elements aligned to the grid (no "almost aligned" items)?
  • Density: Is information density appropriate for the content type (data-heavy vs. marketing)?
  • Whitespace: Is whitespace used intentionally to group and separate?
  • Consistency: Are similar sections spaced identically?

Spacing audit:

## Spacing Consistency Check
| Element Pair | Expected Gap | Actual Gap | Consistent? |
|-------------|-------------|------------|-------------|
| Section title to content | 24px | 24px | Yes |
| Card to card | 16px | 16px/24px | No — inconsistent |
| Form label to input | 8px | 4px/8px/12px | No — varies |

Expected: Layout uses a systematic grid and spacing scale consistently. On failure: If spacing is inconsistent, recommend adopting a spacing scale (e.g., Tailwind's space-*).

Step 5: Evaluate Responsive Design

Test across key breakpoints:

BreakpointWidthRepresents
Mobile375pxiPhone SE / small phones
Mobile L428pxiPhone 14 / large phones
Tablet768pxiPad portrait
Desktop1280pxStandard laptop
Wide1536px+Desktop monitor

Check at each breakpoint:

  • Layout adaptation: Does the layout reflow appropriately (stack on mobile, side-by-side on desktop)?
  • Touch targets: Are interactive elements at least 44x44px on mobile?
  • Text readability: Is font size appropriate for the viewport?
  • Image scaling: Do images resize without distortion or overflow?
  • Navigation: Is mobile navigation accessible (hamburger, bottom nav, etc.)?
  • No horizontal scroll: Content doesn't overflow the viewport horizontally
## Responsive Review
| Breakpoint | Layout | Touch Targets | Text | Images | Navigation | Issues |
|-----------|--------|---------------|------|--------|------------|--------|
| 375px | OK | OK | OK | Overflow on hero | Hamburger | Hero image clips |
| 768px | OK | OK | OK | OK | Hamburger | None |
| 1280px | OK | N/A | OK | OK | Full nav | None |
| 1536px | OK | N/A | Line length too long | OK | Full nav | Add max-width to content |

Expected: Design tested at all key breakpoints with issues documented. On failure: If responsive testing tools are unavailable, review CSS media queries for coverage.

Step 6: Check Brand Consistency

  • Logo usage: Logo rendered correctly (size, spacing, clear zone)
  • Colour accuracy: Brand colours match spec (hex values, not "close enough")
  • Typography match: Fonts match brand guidelines
  • Tone/voice: UI copy matches brand personality
  • Iconography: Icons are from a consistent set (style, weight, grid)
  • Photography style: Images match brand guidelines (if applicable)

Expected: Brand elements verified against guidelines with specific deviations noted. On failure: If brand guidelines don't exist, note this as a recommendation and assess internal consistency instead.

Step 7: Write the Design Review

## Web Design Review

### Overall Impression
[2-3 sentences: overall quality, strongest and weakest aspects]

### Visual Hierarchy: [Score/5]
[Key findings with specific references]

### Typography: [Score/5]
[Key findings with specific references]

### Colour: [Score/5]
[Key findings with specific references]

### Layout & Spacing: [Score/5]
[Key findings with specific references]

### Responsive Design: [Score/5]
[Key findings with specific references]

### Brand Consistency: [Score/5]
[Key findings with specific references]

### Priority Improvements
1. [Most impactful change — specific and actionable]
2. [Second priority]
3. [Third priority]

### Positive Notes
1. [What works well and should be preserved]

Expected: Review provides specific, visual-reference feedback with prioritized improvements. On failure: If scoring feels arbitrary, use a simpler pass/concern/fail system instead.

Validation

  • Visual hierarchy assessed for all major pages/sections
  • Typography evaluated for readability, consistency, and scale
  • Colour contrast verified against WCAG AA minimums
  • Layout and spacing checked for grid consistency
  • Responsive design tested at 3+ breakpoints
  • Brand consistency verified against guidelines (or internal consistency assessed)
  • Feedback is specific with visual references (page, section, element)

Common Pitfalls

  • Subjective without reasoning: "I don't like the colour" is not actionable. Explain why (contrast, brand mismatch, accessibility).
  • Ignoring accessibility: Visual design review must include WCAG contrast checks. Beautiful designs that exclude users are not good designs.
  • Reviewing mockups only: Test responsive behaviour, hover states, and transitions — not just static layouts.
  • Prescribing solutions: Describe the problem ("text is hard to read on this background") rather than dictating a specific fix ("use #333").
  • Forgetting context: A banking app and a gaming site have different design standards. Review against the appropriate context.

Related Skills

  • review-ux-ui — usability, interaction patterns, and accessibility (complementary to visual design)
  • setup-tailwind-typescript — Tailwind CSS implementation for design systems
  • scaffold-nextjs-app — Next.js application scaffolding

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Execute structural metamorphosis using strangler fig migration, chrysalis phases, and interface preservation. Covers transformation planning, parallel running, progressive cutover, rollback design, and post-metamorphosis stabilization for system architecture evolution. Use when assess-form has classified the system as READY for transformation, when migrating from monolith to microservices, when replacing a core subsystem while dependents continue operating, or when any architectural change must be gradual rather than big-bang.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

pjt222/agent-almanac372026年10月12日 更新

adaptic

無料

Master skill composing the 5-step synoptic cycle for panoramic synthesis across multiple domains. Orchestrates meditate, expand-awareness, observe, awareness, integrate-gestalt, and express-insight into a coherent process that produces unified understanding rather than sequential compromise. Use when a problem genuinely spans 3+ domains and the interactions between domains matter more than depth in any one, when sequential analysis feels like compromise rather than integration, or before major architectural decisions affecting multiple stakeholders.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

pjt222/agent-almanac372026年10月12日 更新

Scaffold a new puzzle type across all 10+ pipeline integration points in jigsawR. Creates the core puzzle module, wires it into the unified pipeline (generation, positioning, rendering, adjacency), adds ggpuzzle geom/stat layers, updates DESCRIPTION and config.yml, extends the Shiny app, and creates a comprehensive test suite. Use when adding a completely new puzzle type to the package or following the 10-point integration checklist to ensure nothing is missed end-to-end.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

pjt222/agent-almanac372026年10月12日 更新

Add Rcpp or RcppArmadillo integration to an R package for high-performance C++ code. Covers setup, writing C++ functions, RcppExports generation, testing compiled code, and debugging. Use when an R function is too slow and profiling confirms a bottleneck, when you need to interface with existing C/C++ libraries, or when implementing algorithms (loops, recursion, linear algebra) that benefit from compiled code.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

pjt222/agent-almanac372026年10月12日 更新

aikido

無料

Practice aikido as a defensive martial art emphasizing harmony, redirection, and controlled resolution. Covers centering and grounding, ukemi (safe falling and rolling), core techniques (irimi-nage, shiho-nage, kote-gaeshi, ikkyo), blending and tai sabaki (body movement), randori (multiple attacker practice), weapons awareness, and applying principles off the mat. Use when learning a defensive martial art that prioritizes de-escalation, developing the ability to redirect aggression without causing unnecessary harm, building safe falling skills, or cultivating calm centeredness under physical pressure.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

pjt222/agent-almanac372026年10月12日 更新

Analyze an arbitrary codebase to identify functions, APIs, and data sources suitable for exposure as MCP tools, producing a tool specification document. Use when planning an MCP server for an existing project, auditing a codebase before wrapping it as an AI-accessible tool surface, comparing what a codebase can do versus what is already exposed via MCP, or generating a tool spec to hand off to scaffold-mcp-server.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

pjt222/agent-almanac372026年10月12日 更新

pjt222 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する