Parsons/.claude/skills/critique/SKILL.md

name, description, user-invocable, argument-hint

name	description	user-invocable	argument-hint
critique	UX design review — evaluates visual hierarchy, emotional journey, cognitive load, and overall quality using Nielsen's heuristics (scored 0-40). Adapted from impeccable (Apache 2.0).	true	[component or area to critique]

Conduct a holistic UX design critique. Think like a design director giving feedback — evaluate whether the interface actually works as a designed experience, not just technically.

Target: $ARGUMENTS

Preparation

1. Read docs/design-system.md for FA design context and brand guidelines
2. Read docs/memory/decisions-log.md for design rationale
3. Read the target component/area source and stories
4. Reference docs/reference/impeccable/cognitive-load.md for the 8-item checklist
5. Reference docs/reference/impeccable/heuristics-scoring.md for scoring criteria

FA context reminder: Funeral Arranger serves families often in grief or distress. The design must feel warm, trustworthy, transparent, and calm. Clarity over cleverness. Accessibility is critical — users may be elderly, emotional, or unfamiliar with technology.

Phase 1: Design Critique

Evaluate across these dimensions:

1. Visual Hierarchy

• Does the eye flow to the most important element first?
• Is there a clear primary action visible within 2 seconds?
• Do size, colour, and position communicate importance correctly?
• Is there visual competition between elements of different weights?

2. Information Architecture & Cognitive Load

• Is the structure intuitive for a first-time user?
• Is related content grouped logically?
• Are there too many choices at once? (>4 at a decision point = flag it)
• Run the 8-item cognitive load checklist from docs/reference/impeccable/cognitive-load.md
• Report failure count: 0-1 = low (good), 2-3 = moderate, 4+ = critical

3. Emotional Journey

• Does the interface feel warm and trustworthy (appropriate for FA)?
• Would a grieving family member feel "this is for me"?
• Are there design interventions at anxiety-prone moments (pricing, commitment, forms)?
• Does the experience end well (confirmation, clear next step)?

4. Discoverability & Affordance

• Are interactive elements obviously interactive?
• Would a user know what to do without instructions?
• Are hover/focus states providing useful feedback?

5. Composition & Balance

• Does the layout feel balanced?
• Is whitespace used intentionally?
• Is there visual rhythm in spacing and repetition?

6. Typography as Communication

• Does the type hierarchy signal what to read first, second, third?
• Is body text comfortable to read? (line length 45-75ch, adequate size)
• Do font choices reinforce FA's warm, professional tone?

7. Colour with Purpose

• Is colour used to communicate, not just decorate?
• Does the warm gold/copper brand palette feel cohesive?
• Are accent colours drawing attention to the right things?
• Does it work for colourblind users?

8. States & Edge Cases

• Empty states: Do they guide users toward action?
• Loading states: Do they reduce perceived wait time?
• Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming? (critical for FA — no aggressive red labels)
• Success states: Do they confirm and guide next steps?

9. Microcopy & Voice

• Is the writing clear and concise?
• Does it sound warm and professional (FA's tone)?
• Are labels and buttons unambiguous?
• Does error copy help users fix the problem without distress?

Phase 2: Present Findings

Design Health Score

Score each of Nielsen's 10 heuristics 0-4 (consult docs/reference/impeccable/heuristics-scoring.md):

#	Heuristic	Score	Key Issue
1	Visibility of System Status	?
2	Match System / Real World	?
3	User Control and Freedom	?
4	Consistency and Standards	?
5	Error Prevention	?
6	Recognition Rather Than Recall	?
7	Flexibility and Efficiency	?
8	Aesthetic and Minimalist Design	?
9	Error Recovery	?
10	Help and Documentation	?
Total		??/40	[Rating]

Ratings: 36-40 Excellent, 28-35 Good, 20-27 Acceptable, 12-19 Poor, 0-11 Critical

Overall Impression

Brief gut reaction — what works, what doesn't, the single biggest opportunity.

What's Working

2-3 things done well. Be specific about why they work.

Priority Issues

3-5 most impactful design problems, ordered by importance.

For each issue, tag P0-P3:

• [P?] What: Name the problem
• Why it matters: How it hurts users (especially in FA's sensitive context)
• Fix: Concrete recommendation

FA Audience Check

Walk through the primary user flow as:

1. Bereaved family member (60+, first time, emotional, possibly on mobile)
2. Arrangement planner (30-50, comparing options, price-sensitive, wants transparency)

For each persona, list specific pain points found.

Minor Observations

Quick notes on smaller issues worth addressing.

Remember: Be direct and specific. Say what's wrong AND why it matters. Prioritise ruthlessly. Don't soften criticism — honest feedback ships better design.