本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

design-system-doc

Document a design system component. Use when the user says "design system docs", "document this for the design system", "add this to the design system", "design token", "component library docs", "style guide", "design system entry", or wants to formally document a pattern, component, or token for team-wide use - even if they don't explicitly say "design system".

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md4.4 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。

Overview

Based on "Atomic Design" by Brad Frost. A design system is not a component library - it's a shared language. Frost's insight: components without documentation are just code. Documentation is what transforms a component library into a system that a whole team can use consistently without needing to ask the original designer.

Design system documentation has two audiences: designers who need to use the pattern correctly, and engineers who need to implement it accurately. Write for both.

Workflow

Step 1: Establish the entry structure

Every design system entry should follow the same structure so team members can predict where to find information:

1. Overview (what this is, one paragraph)
2. When to use / when not to use
3. Anatomy (labeled diagram of all parts)
4. Variants
5. States
6. Design tokens used
7. Usage examples (correct and incorrect)
8. Accessibility
9. Related components
10. Changelog

Step 2: Write the overview

One paragraph: what is this component/pattern? What job does it do in the UI?

Include a simple visual (or Figma embed) showing the component in its default state.

Step 3: When to use / when not to use

This is the most important section. Design systems fail when components are used outside their intended context.

Use when:
- [specific context 1]
- [specific context 2]

Don't use when:
- [anti-context 1] - use [alternative] instead
- [anti-context 2] - use [alternative] instead

Step 4: Document the anatomy

Label every part of the component. Each part should have:

  • A name (used consistently in code and design)
  • Whether it's required or optional
  • Constraints (max length, image dimensions, etc.)

Step 5: Document design tokens

List every token the component uses:

TokenValueRole
color.interactive.primary#0066CCBackground color
spacing.md16pxInternal padding
radius.sm4pxBorder radius
typography.body.md16px / 24pxLabel text

Using tokens (not hardcoded values) ensures the component responds correctly to theme changes in [your design system].

Step 6: Add usage examples

Show correct and incorrect usage with visual examples:

Correct: [example with explanation of why it's correct] Incorrect: [example with explanation of why it's wrong and what to do instead]

At least 2-3 of each. Real examples beat abstract rules.

Step 7: Document accessibility

  • Keyboard interactions
  • Screen reader behavior
  • Required ARIA attributes
  • Color contrast compliance (WCAG AA)
  • Touch target size compliance

Step 8: Add a changelog

Every time the component changes, log it:

v1.2 - [date] - Added loading state. [your team]
v1.1 - [date] - Updated border radius to match new tokens. [your team]
v1.0 - [date] - Initial release. [your team]

Anti-Patterns

1. Documentation written only for designers Bad: Docs describe visual design but no tokens, props, or accessibility. Good: Document at both design and implementation level. Engineers should be able to build from the doc alone.

2. No "when not to use" section Bad: Only positive usage guidance. Good: "When not to use" prevents misuse and is often more valuable than "when to use."

3. Hardcoded values instead of tokens Bad: Component documented with hex codes and pixel values. Good: Everything references a named token. Tokens are the vocabulary of [your design system].

4. No changelog Bad: Component updated silently. Good: Every change logged with version, date, and author. [Your team] can see what changed and when.

Quality Checklist

  • Standard entry structure followed (overview through changelog)
  • When to use AND when not to use documented
  • Anatomy labeled with names used in both design and code
  • All design tokens documented (not hardcoded values)
  • Correct and incorrect usage examples included
  • Accessibility: keyboard, screen reader, ARIA, contrast
  • Changelog entry added for this version
  • Related components cross-referenced

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

Rate any product, feature, or experience on the 11-star scale (Brian Chesky's Airbnb thought experiment). Use when user says "rate this experience", "11-star", "star rating", "experience audit", "how good is this", "experience rating", "product audit", "quality assessment", or wants to evaluate product quality and identify improvement paths. Also trigger when user wants to benchmark a feature, assess where a product stands, or map out what "great" looks like - even if they don't explicitly say "11-star".

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。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Generate A/B copy variants grounded in Eugene Schwartz's awareness and market-sophistication stages and John Caples' tested-headline discipline. Every variant declares its angle, the awareness stage it targets, and a falsifiable hypothesis, and the skill recommends which pair to test first and what delta counts as signal. Use when the user says "A/B test this", "write variants", "give me options", "test different angles", "copy variants", "ab copy", "test this headline", "multiple versions", "which version is better", or wants to test copy before publishing. For reviewing copy that already exists, see copy-review. For sample size and stopping rules, see growth-experiment. For diagnosing a page rather than its words, see page-cro. For full paid ad sets by platform, see ad-campaign-writer.

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。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Write measurable acceptance criteria for requirements or user stories. Use when the user says "write acceptance criteria", "definition of done", "how do we test this", "fit criteria", "given when then", "Gherkin scenarios", "what does done look like", "testable conditions", "how will we know this works" - even if they don't explicitly say "acceptance criteria".

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。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Build a strategic account plan for winning, retaining, or expanding a named account. Use when the user says "build an account plan", "strategic account planning", "how do I grow this account", "account expansion strategy", "whitespace analysis", "QBR prep", "key account review", "map the stakeholders in this account", "land and expand plan", "how do I break into [company]", or wants a structured strategy for a specific account.

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。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Write paid ad copy for LinkedIn, Google, Meta, and YouTube. Produces multiple variants per platform, each targeting a different Eugene Schwartz awareness level and Cialdini persuasion principle. Use when the user asks for ad copy, ad variants, "write LinkedIn ads", Google ads, Meta ads, paid social copy, ad headlines, or wants creative for a paid campaign. Reads brand voice, ICP, and positioning from knowledge/. For organic social posts, see linkedin-post or social-calendar. For the landing page the ad points at, see landing-page-writer. For testing variants, see ab-copy-writer.

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。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Design clean and consistent APIs. Use when the user says "design an API", "API design review", "design these endpoints", "REST API for X", "GraphQL schema", "API contract", "how should this endpoint work", "review my API design", or wants to create or improve an API interface - even if they don't explicitly say "API design".

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。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

qa-aman のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する