Product Design Critique
Give a structured product design critique — user job clarity, hierarchy, affordance, error states, accessibility, and consistency — focused on what to change, in what order, and why.
A structured critique pass for a screen, flow, or component. The output is a prioritized list of changes a designer or engineer can act on — ordered by impact, with reasons — not a redesign and not adjectives.
This is an optional catalog skill — opt-in (install when you need it). For how to install, audit, update, assign, and reset catalog skills, see the Skills reference.
When to use
- A designer or engineer asks for feedback on a screen, mock, or live UI.
- A feature is shipping and someone wants a final UX read.
- A flow is suspected of causing drop-off and you want a pre-research read before instrumentation.
When not to use
- The user wants a redesign — that's a design project, not a critique.
- The work is so early there's no concrete artifact to critique.
- You have no context on the user job — ask for it first.
Catalog metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Catalog id | paperclipai:optional:product:design-critique |
| Canonical key | paperclipai/optional/product/design-critique |
| Catalog path | catalog/optional/product/design-critique |
| Kind | optional |
| Category | product |
| Slug | design-critique |
| Entrypoint | SKILL.md |
| Trust level | markdown_only |
| Compatibility | compatible |
| Default install | false |
| Recommended roles | designer, product, engineer |
| Requires | — |
| Tags | design, product, ux, review |
| Files | 1 |
| Content hash | sha256:429f94df398a0697042b5bbe4755b1ff1a230aa5f41d99118ad37493ac65d21c |
| Package | @paperclipai/skills-catalog@0.3.1 |
File inventory
| Path | Kind | Bytes |
|---|---|---|
SKILL.md |
skill |
4,851 |
Full skill definition
The block below is the complete, authoritative SKILL.md for this skill — the exact file an agent loads at runtime. Use the controls in the top-right of the block to copy it or download it as SKILL.md.
---
name: design-critique
description: Give a structured product design critique — user job clarity, hierarchy, affordance, error states, accessibility, and consistency — focused on what to change, in what order, and why.
key: paperclipai/optional/product/design-critique
recommendedForRoles:
- designer
- product
- engineer
tags:
- design
- product
- ux
- review
---
# Product Design Critique
A structured critique pass for a screen, flow, or component. The output is a prioritized list of changes a designer or engineer can act on — not adjectives. Critique is not redesign; recommend, do not rebuild.
## When to use
- A designer or engineer asks for feedback on a screen, mock, or live UI.
- A feature is shipping and someone wants a final UX read.
- A flow is suspected of causing user drop-off and you want a pre-research read before instrumentation.
## When not to use
- The user wants a redesign. That is a design project, not a critique.
- The work is so early that no concrete artifact exists. Sketch with them instead of critiquing air.
- You have no context on the user job. Ask for it first; design critique without user context devolves into taste.
## Pre-critique context
Before opening a screen, get:
- **Who is the user.** Specific role and competence, not "users".
- **What job they are doing on this screen.** One sentence.
- **What success looks like.** What the user can do after this screen that they could not before.
- **Where this screen sits in the larger flow.** What precedes and follows.
If any of these is missing, ask. Critique without these is opinion.
## The pass (in order)
1. **Clarity of the user job.**
- Within 3 seconds of opening, is it obvious what this screen is for?
- Does the primary action match the user's actual job, or a designer's preferred path?
2. **Visual hierarchy.**
- The most important thing on the screen should be the most prominent (size, weight, position, color).
- Secondary actions should look secondary. Tertiary should be findable but not loud.
- Headings should chunk content into the right groups for the task.
3. **Affordance and signifiers.**
- Clickable things look clickable.
- Disabled things look disabled and explain why on hover/focus.
- Drag, scroll, or swipe interactions are discoverable, not hidden.
4. **States.**
- Empty state (no data) is designed, not a blank rectangle.
- Loading state communicates progress, not just spins.
- Error states say what went wrong and what to do next, in the user's words.
- Success state confirms without celebrating banal actions.
5. **Inputs and forms.**
- Labels visible, not just placeholders.
- Validation runs at the right time (on blur, not on every keystroke unless the user is in a known-format field).
- Required fields marked.
- Field order matches the user's mental order, not the database order.
6. **Accessibility.**
- Sufficient color contrast (WCAG AA at minimum; AAA where reasonable).
- Focus order is logical for keyboard navigation.
- Interactive elements are reachable without a mouse.
- Critical information is not color-only (icons, text, position back it up).
- Touch targets at least 44×44 px on mobile.
7. **Consistency.**
- Tokens, components, and patterns match the rest of the product.
- "Borrowed" patterns from other products are intentional, not accidental drift.
8. **Copy.**
- Buttons are verbs that name the outcome ("Save changes" beats "Submit").
- Microcopy explains, does not decorate.
- Tone matches the product voice.
9. **Edge cases.**
- Long content (long names, many items, RTL languages).
- Tiny content (one item, zero items).
- Slow network and offline behavior.
- Permissions denied.
## Output format
Group findings by severity, then by category. Each finding is one issue and one suggested fix.
```md
## Design critique: <screen name>
### Must-fix (blocks ship)
- **<category>:** <one-line issue>. **Try:** <one-line suggestion>.
### Should-fix (before broader rollout)
- **<category>:** <one-line issue>. **Try:** <one-line suggestion>.
### Nice-to-fix (when there's room)
- **<category>:** <one-line issue>. **Try:** <one-line suggestion>.
### Strengths to keep
- <one-line thing the design got right>
```
Always include the "strengths to keep" section. It is not flattery — it is signal to the designer about what not to change in the next round.
## Anti-patterns
- "I would do it differently" without saying what or why. That is preference, not critique.
- Long critiques that bury must-fix items under nice-to-haves.
- Suggesting net-new features under the guise of a critique.
- Ignoring user context and grading on taste.
- Treating a critique as approval. State approval explicitly if asked; otherwise critique is feedback, not sign-off.
See also
- Optional skills — all optional catalog skills grouped by category.
- Skills reference — file shape, install pipeline, catalog browse/install/audit/update/reset, assignment, and troubleshooting.
- App-shipped catalog — how bundled and optional catalog skills are versioned and kept current.
- Skills guide — the UI walkthrough and built-in catalog overview.