Results for “quality-check”

Audits and enforces web interface standards covering accessibility, performance, UX, and code quality from Vercel Engineering's Web Interface Guidelines. Use this skill when reviewing UI code, checking accessibility compliance, auditing design implementations, running pre-merge frontend checks, or when someone asks to "review my UI", "check accessibility", "check my site", "audit design", or "is this component correct". Apply proactively when writing form elements, interactive components, images, animations, or anything that users directly touch — these guidelines prevent common mistakes before they reach production.

Transforms source materials (URLs, PDFs, DOCX, Markdown, text, screenshots) into a single-file HTML web article that is visually polished, offline-accessible, and shareable, using a structured editorial workflow with checkpoints and quality reviews.

Audit images across AEM Edge Delivery Services pages for SEO and performance, checking alt text quality, dimensions, lazy loading, fetch priority, file naming, and decorative image handling, and generate per-page reports with fix instructions.

Review a built frontend against its chosen direction, catch drift back to generic AI defaults, enforce state coverage, ethical patterns, UX heuristics, and polish, and check contrast with APCA (not the legacy WCAG ratio). Produces specific, prioritized fixes — never vibes-based feedback. Works with pasted screenshots or Playwright MCP automated capture. Load when the user asks to review a UI, audit a design, check if a frontend looks generic or vibecoded, evaluate visual quality or polish, says "review this UI", "is this design good", "audit my frontend", "does this feel like [product]", "design QA", or when frontend-design routes here. Sub-skill of frontend-design.

Reconstruct a product flow, then audit how usable it is — whether it makes sense, where users get confused or stuck, whether the copy and instructions are clear, and where friction causes drop-off. Produces a prioritized, severity-weighted findings report. Works from three inputs: frontend code in a repo, a live running app driven via a browser, or a written flow / spec / screenshots. Use this skill whenever the user asks for a UX review, usability audit, "is this flow confusing", "does this signup/onboarding/checkout make sense", "why are people dropping off", "audit this form", "where's the friction", or hands over a flow and asks whether it's user-friendly. Trigger even on casual phrasings ("is my checkout any good?") — it imposes the structure ad-hoc UX opinions miss. Audits flow usability and friction; for visual polish and interface quality the impeccable audit/critique skills apply instead.

Audits an EXISTING UI/codebase for generic AI patterns and applies targeted craft fixes — layout, interactivity, content, iconography, and code quality — without discarding the project's own identity. Use when a UI looks flat, generic, or "AI-slop" and there is code to improve, not build from scratch. Triggers on: "improve the design", "looks generic", "not polished enough", "redesign this", "elevate the UI", "it looks boring", "make it better looking", "apply taste", "design review". Works with any CSS framework. For designing a NEW project's identity from a brief, use `taste-skill` instead — this skill only upgrades what's already built. Source: github.com/Leonxlnx/taste-skill (redesign-skill), restored to the full checklist + the project-identity rule the earlier port had dropped.