# Visual Review

> Critique an existing logo, VI system, brochure, catalog, key visual, poster, product/effect image, campaign asset, or print layout using concrete visual evidence. Use for design review, before/after comparison, revision planning, quality control, or when the user asks what is wrong, what to improve, or whether a design is ready to present or produce.

- Skill: `devotionn/visual-review` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add devotionn/visual-review`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/devotionn/visual-review/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Marketing & Growth
- Author: devotionn (https://skillmd.com/u/devotionn)
- Updated: 2026-09-22
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/devotionn/visual-review

---


# Visual Review

Review the actual artifact or render when available. Do not infer visual quality from filenames or source text alone.

## Procedure

1. Restate the artifact's apparent objective, audience, medium, and constraints.
2. Inspect at the correct scale: whole composition first, then detail. For multi-page work, inspect sequence and representative spreads.
3. Separate findings into:
   - objective or production defects
   - communication/hierarchy problems
   - system consistency problems
   - art-direction / taste judgments
4. Evaluate brand fit, message hierarchy, composition, typography, color, imagery, spacing/rhythm, consistency, distinctiveness, and medium-specific production risk.
5. Cite concrete evidence for every material finding: location, page, element, crop, size, contrast relationship, or repeated pattern.
6. Prioritize fixes by impact and leverage:
   - P0: factual, unusable, production-blocking, or severe recognition/legibility issue
   - P1: material communication or consistency issue
   - P2: refinement/polish
7. Recommend a correction that preserves the useful parts of the current design. Avoid redesigning everything by default.
8. Re-review changed artifacts when available.

## Output

Use concise findings with priority, evidence, why it matters, and recommended correction. End with unresolved decisions, not a fake taste score.

## Failure conditions

Do not review visual quality from code/text alone when an artifact can be inspected. Do not use vague feedback such as "more premium" without translating it into concrete design changes.