How do I install the Review Design skill?

Run npx get-skill add gtrabanco/review-design in your terminal (requires Node.js), paste this page's agent-chat prompt into Claude, Cursor, or any MCP-connected agent, or download the SKILL.md file and copy it into your agent's skills directory.

Is Review Design safe to use?

This skill has not completed SkillMD's automated safety review yet. Independent scanners report: SkillSpector: PASS, Skill Scanner: PASS. Capability flags: reads secrets. SkillMD never runs a skill's scripts for you; review the SKILL.md before installing.

Which AI agents work with Review Design?

This skill is tagged as working with Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex. SKILL.md is an open format, so most agents that read a skills directory can load it too.

Is Review Design free to use?

Yes. Installing skills from SkillMD is free. This skill is licensed under MIT.

Who published Review Design?

gtrabanco (@gtrabanco) published this skill. Their other Agent Skills are listed on their SkillMD profile.

Review Design by gtrabanco — Agent Skill

Name: Review Design
Author: gtrabanco

Review Design

Internal UI/UX design review pass of the agentic-workflow review pack — composed in-turn by review-change and product-audit; not a menu entry. Checks the changed UI against the project's design doc: consistency, states, responsiveness, and reuse — applies only when the project has a UI and the change touches it. Findings only; never edits code.

gtrabanco Updated Nov 11, 2026

File contents

Review Design (internal)

Composed by review-change / product-audit within their conversation — on any agent, follow this file inline as the routed step. Findings only; never edits, never refactors.

Scope

The caller's diff or path/glob — the shape is the finder contract's (skills/review-implementation/references/FINDER_CONTRACT.md, this section's owner). State the scope at the top of the returned table.

Checklist (evaluate EVERY item — none is optional; n/a must be stated)

✓ Read the project's design doc first (e.g. docs/frontend/DESIGN.md) — cite the rule for every finding ✓ Changed components reuse the design system (no one-off styles/colors/spacing duplicating existing tokens or components) ✓ Every new/changed view handles ALL states: loading, empty, error, success (cite each) ✓ Responsive behavior stated and honored at the project's breakpoints (n/a if the platform has none) ✓ No hardcoded user-facing strings where the project declares i18n (cite the i18n doc) ✓ Visual hierarchy: primary action distinguishable, one primary action per view ✓ Consistency with sibling screens (same patterns for the same interactions — cite the diverging sibling) ✓ Destructive actions require confirmation and are visually distinct ✓ Feedback on every user action (submit, save, fail) — no silent operations

Materiality bar

The bar is owned by skills/review-implementation/references/FINDER_CONTRACT.md — apply it as written: cite the rule it violates beside the evidence; never pad the table.

Return exactly

Sev and Impact are the two published closed sets (BLOCKER | CRITICAL | WARNING | SUGGESTION and blocking | docs-only | report-only); their meanings are owned by review-implementation (CLASSIFY.md §Severity ladder) — assign a token, never a prose grade.

REVIEW DESIGN — scope: <scope>

| # | Finding | Sev | Impact | Evidence | Suggested fix |
|---|---------|-----|--------|----------|---------------|
| 1 | <what>  | BLOCKER|CRITICAL|WARNING|SUGGESTION | blocking|docs-only|report-only | <file:line> | <smallest action> |

Checklist: <n> evaluated, <n> pass, <n> findings, <n> n/a (<which + why>)
Summary: <1-2 sentences>
Decision: PASS | FAIL

FAIL if any BLOCKER, CRITICAL or WARNING finding is open; PASS otherwise. SUGGESTION findings never block — they route to the caller's triage step.

Done when

Every checklist item was evaluated with evidence (file:line or command output) or explicitly marked n/a with the reason.
The fixed-format block above is returned — nothing more, nothing less — and no code was changed.

---name: review-designuser-invocable: falseversion: 4.10.0author: "Gabriel Trabanco <1969593+gtrabanco@users.noreply.github.com>"license: MITdescription: > Internal UI/UX design review pass of the agentic-workflow review pack — composed in-turn by review-change and product-audit; not a menu entry. Checks the changed UI against the project's design doc: consistency, states, responsiveness, and reuse — applies only when the project has a UI and the change touches it. Findings only; never edits code.metadata: source: https://skillmd.com/skills/gtrabanco/review-design---# Review Design (internal)Composed by `review-change` / `product-audit` within their conversation — on anyagent, follow this file inline as the routed step. **Findings only; never edits,never refactors.**## ScopeThe caller's diff or path/glob — the shape is the finder contract's(`skills/review-implementation/references/FINDER_CONTRACT.md`, this section's owner). State the scope at the top of thereturned table.## Checklist (evaluate EVERY item — none is optional; n/a must be stated)✓ Read the project's design doc first (e.g. docs/frontend/DESIGN.md) — cite the rule for every finding✓ Changed components reuse the design system (no one-off styles/colors/spacing duplicating existing tokens or components)✓ Every new/changed view handles ALL states: loading, empty, error, success (cite each)✓ Responsive behavior stated and honored at the project's breakpoints (n/a if the platform has none)✓ No hardcoded user-facing strings where the project declares i18n (cite the i18n doc)✓ Visual hierarchy: primary action distinguishable, one primary action per view✓ Consistency with sibling screens (same patterns for the same interactions — cite the diverging sibling)✓ Destructive actions require confirmation and are visually distinct✓ Feedback on every user action (submit, save, fail) — no silent operations## Materiality barThe bar is owned by `skills/review-implementation/references/FINDER_CONTRACT.md` —apply it as written: cite the rule it violates beside the evidence; never pad the table.## Return exactly`Sev` and `Impact` are the two published closed sets (`BLOCKER | CRITICAL |WARNING | SUGGESTION` and `blocking | docs-only | report-only`); their meaningsare owned by `review-implementation` (`CLASSIFY.md` §Severity ladder) — assign atoken, never a prose grade.```REVIEW DESIGN — scope: <scope>| # | Finding | Sev | Impact | Evidence | Suggested fix ||---|---------|-----|--------|----------|---------------|| 1 | <what> | BLOCKER|CRITICAL|WARNING|SUGGESTION | blocking|docs-only|report-only | <file:line> | <smallest action> |Checklist: <n> evaluated, <n> pass, <n> findings, <n> n/a (<which + why>)Summary: <1-2 sentences>Decision: PASS | FAIL```FAIL if any `BLOCKER`, `CRITICAL` or `WARNING` finding is open; PASS otherwise.`SUGGESTION` findings never block — they route to the caller's triage step.## Done when- Every checklist item was evaluated with evidence (file:line or command output) or explicitly marked n/a with the reason.- The fixed-format block above is returned — nothing more, nothing less — and no code was changed.

Frequently asked questions