UI Audit

### Quick judgment A strong, opinionated skill for generating structured UI/UX audits, best suited to web/app interfaces where you can describe or reference specific screens. It emphasizes contextual decision-making (macro bets, JTBD, constraints) and turns that into a clear JSON report. ### Key strengths - **High structure & clarity**: Required and contextual sections are precisely defined, with 6–10 checks per area, making outputs predictable and easy to review or integrate into tools. - **Framework-driven**: Uses an explicit decision workflow (weigh → narrow → execute) and pattern references, reducing arbitrary or purely aesthetic feedback. - **Broad UX coverage**: Includes visual hierarchy, style, accessibility, navigation, usability, onboarding, social proof, and forms. ### Risks / limitations - **Speculative diagnostics**: Without direct access to code, analytics, or actual assistive tech, accessibility and behavior-related findings are inferential, not verifications. - **Context dependency**: Quality of audits will heavily depend on how well the user describes the product, macro bets, and JTBD; vague prompts will yield generic guidance. - **Conventional scope**: Optimized for typical web/app UI patterns; less reliable for highly unconventional interfaces (e.g., 3D, AR/VR, voice-only). ### Recommended scenarios - Early-stage design reviews and design critiques where you need structured feedback quickly. - Startups or small teams lacking senior UX leadership but wanting a repeatable audit format. - Agencies and consultants generating standardized UX audit deliverables across many clients. - Product teams aligning UI decisions with business “macro bets” (velocity, efficiency, accuracy, innovation) and JTBD-focused reasoning.