Skills › Software Development › Code quality & review
design-review
Core pack — always active for visual work. Quality gate for UI, components, pages, layouts, or frontend work. Triggers on any visual/design task automatically. Use before presenting work, during builds, and for design QA.
The full skill
—
name: design-review
description: >
Core pack — always active for visual work. Quality gate for UI, components, pages,
layouts, or frontend work. Triggers on any visual/design task automatically.
Use before presenting work, during builds, and for design QA.
—
# Design Review Skill
## Core Pack — Always Active
This is a core skill. Apply it on ALL visual and frontend work, no exceptions. You do not need permission or a specific trigger to use this.
## When to Use
– Before presenting ANY visual or UX work.
– Treat this as a quality gate, not optional polish.
– Sub-agents doing design/frontend work MUST run this before announcing completion.
## Pre-Work: Read Before Building
### 1. Read the project's guidelines
– Read `guidelines.md` or equivalent design system doc first if it exists.
– Follow the project's existing components, tokens, and patterns before inventing anything.
– If no formal guidelines exist, inspect the existing product and match its logic.
### 2. Research before designing
– Check how similar tools solve the same problem before inventing a pattern.
– Use proven references when they exist.
– Quality bar references:
– UX Tools — editorial restraint, typography, calm hierarchy
– Inflight by Ridd — motion, depth, data viz polish
– Linear — dense information, excellent hierarchy, no noise
– Vercel dashboard — spacing, typography, dark mode discipline
### 3. Check design memory
– Read `memory/channels/{channel-name}.md` for prior design decisions.
– If memory says Aaron rejected a pattern, don't repeat it.
– If a project brain file is linked from channel memory, read that too.
## Aaron's Core Principles
– Restraint IS the design.
– Spacing is the #1 tell.
– Typography hierarchy > color for information architecture.
– Match references at pixel level before adding your own ideas.
– Existing patterns > new patterns.
– Interactive elements should feel polished, not dead.
– If the foundation is wrong, no polish fixes it.
– Good design is centripetal, not centrifugal.
## Reference Files
Read only what the task needs. Keep this SKILL lean, load detail on demand:
– `references/typography.md` — hierarchy, scale, pairing, measure
– `references/color.md` — restrained palettes, tinted neutrals, contrast, OKLCH
– `references/spacing.md` — spacing system, rhythm, grouping, layout density
– `references/motion.md` — timing, easing, reduced motion, interactive feel
– `references/anti-patterns.md` — patterns Aaron will clock instantly and reject
### For sub-agents
– Read the relevant reference files based on what you're building.
– New layout or dashboard? Read spacing + anti-patterns.
– Type-heavy screen? Read typography + spacing.
– Color or theming work? Read color + anti-patterns.
– Interactive polish? Read motion + anti-patterns.
– If in doubt, at minimum read spacing + anti-patterns.
## Pre-Flight Checklist
Run this EVERY TIME before presenting work to Aaron.
### Step 1: Visual verification
– [ ] Take a screenshot of the rendered result.
– [ ] Compare side-by-side with the reference if one exists.
– [ ] Check the target viewport, not an arbitrary devtools width.
### Step 2: Design audit
– [ ] Spacing check — enough breathing room? Default to more.
– [ ] Color check — did you add color that wasn't necessary?
– [ ] Typography check — is hierarchy clear without leaning on color?
– [ ] Pattern check — are you using the project's existing components?
– [ ] Interaction check — hover, focus, active states exist and feel intentional.
– [ ] Integrity check — no placeholders, dead states, broken assets, or missing data handling.
### Step 3: Honesty check
– [ ] Is it actually done?
– [ ] Does it meet the brief, not an adjacent brief?
– [ ] Would you be proud to show this to Aaron cold?
### Step 4: Run verification scripts
if you have access to the scripts directory, run these before presenting:
“`bash
# check for common agent anti-patterns
python3 skills/design-review/scripts/anti-pattern-check.py <your-file.tsx>
# verify loading, empty, and error states exist
python3 skills/design-review/scripts/state-check.py <your-file.tsx>
# check semantic HTML, aria labels, alt text, heading hierarchy
python3 skills/design-review/scripts/accessibility-check.py <your-file.tsx>
“`
fix any warnings before presenting. these are the cheapest quality checks — they catch the obvious stuff so the human review can focus on judgment calls.
for CI integration, copy `ci/design-eval.py` and `ci/design-eval.yml` into your project to run all three checks on every PR.
### Step 5: Present with evidence
– Screenshot of the result
– What you referenced
– Known gaps or uncertainties
– Link to live/deployed version if applicable
## Updating This Skill
– After Aaron gives design feedback, capture it.
– Add redirects to `references/anti-patterns.md` or the relevant reference file.
– Add project-specific decisions to channel memory.
– Goal: don't get the same design feedback twice.