Parsons/docs/reference/impeccable/heuristics-scoring.md

Heuristics Scoring Guide

Score each of Nielsen's 10 Usability Heuristics on a 0–4 scale. Be honest — a 4 means genuinely excellent, not "good enough."

Nielsen's 10 Heuristics

1. Visibility of System Status

Keep users informed about what's happening through timely, appropriate feedback.

Check for:

• Loading indicators during async operations
• Confirmation of user actions (save, submit, delete)
• Progress indicators for multi-step processes
• Current location in navigation (breadcrumbs, active states)
• Form validation feedback (inline, not just on submit)

Scoring:

Score	Criteria
0	No feedback — user is guessing what happened
1	Rare feedback — most actions produce no visible response
2	Partial — some states communicated, major gaps remain
3	Good — most operations give clear feedback, minor gaps
4	Excellent — every action confirms, progress is always visible

2. Match Between System and Real World

Speak the user's language. Follow real-world conventions. Information appears in natural, logical order.

Check for:

• Familiar terminology (no unexplained jargon)
• Logical information order matching user expectations
• Recognizable icons and metaphors
• Domain-appropriate language for the target audience
• Natural reading flow (left-to-right, top-to-bottom priority)

Scoring:

Score	Criteria
0	Pure tech jargon, alien to users
1	Mostly confusing — requires domain expertise to navigate
2	Mixed — some plain language, some jargon leaks through
3	Mostly natural — occasional term needs context
4	Speaks the user's language fluently throughout

3. User Control and Freedom

Users need a clear "emergency exit" from unwanted states without extended dialogue.

Check for:

• Undo/redo functionality
• Cancel buttons on forms and modals
• Clear navigation back to safety (home, previous)
• Easy way to clear filters, search, selections
• Escape from long or multi-step processes

Scoring:

Score	Criteria
0	Users get trapped — no way out without refreshing
1	Difficult exits — must find obscure paths to escape
2	Some exits — main flows have escape, edge cases don't
3	Good control — users can exit and undo most actions
4	Full control — undo, cancel, back, and escape everywhere

4. Consistency and Standards

Users shouldn't wonder whether different words, situations, or actions mean the same thing.

Check for:

• Consistent terminology throughout the interface
• Same actions produce same results everywhere
• Platform conventions followed (standard UI patterns)
• Visual consistency (colors, typography, spacing, components)
• Consistent interaction patterns (same gesture = same behavior)

Scoring:

Score	Criteria
0	Inconsistent everywhere — feels like different products stitched together
1	Many inconsistencies — similar things look/behave differently
2	Partially consistent — main flows match, details diverge
3	Mostly consistent — occasional deviation, nothing confusing
4	Fully consistent — cohesive system, predictable behavior

5. Error Prevention

Better than good error messages is a design that prevents problems in the first place.

Check for:

• Confirmation before destructive actions (delete, overwrite)
• Constraints preventing invalid input (date pickers, dropdowns)
• Smart defaults that reduce errors
• Clear labels that prevent misunderstanding
• Autosave and draft recovery

Scoring:

Score	Criteria
0	Errors easy to make — no guardrails anywhere
1	Few safeguards — some inputs validated, most aren't
2	Partial prevention — common errors caught, edge cases slip
3	Good prevention — most error paths blocked proactively
4	Excellent — errors nearly impossible through smart constraints

6. Recognition Rather Than Recall

Minimize memory load. Make objects, actions, and options visible or easily retrievable.

Check for:

• Visible options (not buried in hidden menus)
• Contextual help when needed (tooltips, inline hints)
• Recent items and history
• Autocomplete and suggestions
• Labels on icons (not icon-only navigation)

Scoring:

Score	Criteria
0	Heavy memorization — users must remember paths and commands
1	Mostly recall — many hidden features, few visible cues
2	Some aids — main actions visible, secondary features hidden
3	Good recognition — most things discoverable, few memory demands
4	Everything discoverable — users never need to memorize

7. Flexibility and Efficiency of Use

Accelerators — invisible to novices — speed up expert interaction.

Check for:

• Keyboard shortcuts for common actions
• Customizable interface elements
• Recent items and favorites
• Bulk/batch actions
• Power user features that don't complicate the basics

Scoring:

Score	Criteria
0	One rigid path — no shortcuts or alternatives
1	Limited flexibility — few alternatives to the main path
2	Some shortcuts — basic keyboard support, limited bulk actions
3	Good accelerators — keyboard nav, some customization
4	Highly flexible — multiple paths, power features, customizable

8. Aesthetic and Minimalist Design

Interfaces should not contain irrelevant or rarely needed information. Every element should serve a purpose.

Check for:

• Only necessary information visible at each step
• Clear visual hierarchy directing attention
• Purposeful use of color and emphasis
• No decorative clutter competing for attention
• Focused, uncluttered layouts

Scoring:

Score	Criteria
0	Overwhelming — everything competes for attention equally
1	Cluttered — too much noise, hard to find what matters
2	Some clutter — main content clear, periphery noisy
3	Mostly clean — focused design, minor visual noise
4	Perfectly minimal — every element earns its pixel

9. Help Users Recognize, Diagnose, and Recover from Errors

Error messages should use plain language, precisely indicate the problem, and constructively suggest a solution.

Check for:

• Plain language error messages (no error codes for users)
• Specific problem identification ("Email is missing @" not "Invalid input")
• Actionable recovery suggestions
• Errors displayed near the source of the problem
• Non-blocking error handling (don't wipe the form)

Scoring:

Score	Criteria
0	Cryptic errors — codes, jargon, or no message at all
1	Vague errors — "Something went wrong" with no guidance
2	Clear but unhelpful — names the problem but not the fix
3	Clear with suggestions — identifies problem and offers next steps
4	Perfect recovery — pinpoints issue, suggests fix, preserves user work

10. Help and Documentation

Even if the system is usable without docs, help should be easy to find, task-focused, and concise.

Check for:

• Searchable help or documentation
• Contextual help (tooltips, inline hints, guided tours)
• Task-focused organization (not feature-organized)
• Concise, scannable content
• Easy access without leaving current context

Scoring:

Score	Criteria
0	No help available anywhere
1	Help exists but hard to find or irrelevant
2	Basic help — FAQ or docs exist, not contextual
3	Good documentation — searchable, mostly task-focused
4	Excellent contextual help — right info at the right moment

---

Score Summary

Total possible: 40 points (10 heuristics × 4 max)

Score Range	Rating	What It Means
36–40	Excellent	Minor polish only — ship it
28–35	Good	Address weak areas, solid foundation
20–27	Acceptable	Significant improvements needed before users are happy
12–19	Poor	Major UX overhaul required — core experience broken
0–11	Critical	Redesign needed — unusable in current state

---

Issue Severity (P0–P3)

Tag each individual issue found during scoring with a priority level:

Priority	Name	Description	Action
P0	Blocking	Prevents task completion entirely	Fix immediately — this is a showstopper
P1	Major	Causes significant difficulty or confusion	Fix before release
P2	Minor	Annoyance, but workaround exists	Fix in next pass
P3	Polish	Nice-to-fix, no real user impact	Fix if time permits

Tip: If you're unsure between two levels, ask: "Would a user contact support about this?" If yes, it's at least P1.