majiayu000 Design Scoring
Description
Design Scoring applies the comprehensive rubric to objectively measure design quality on a 1-10 scale. This enables tracking progress across iterations and provides clear targets for improvement.
When to Use
- After each design iteration
- To measure progress toward 9/10 goal
- During design reviews
- To identify specific weak areas
- Before declaring design "complete"
Critical Rule: All designs must achieve 9/10 or higher before delivery.
Instructions for AI Agents
Step 1: Prepare for Scoring
Pre-scoring checklist:
Before scoring, confirm:
- [ ] Design is complete enough to evaluate
- [ ] All key screens are available
- [ ] Responsive versions exist (or can be inferred)
- [ ] Component states are defined
- [ ] Have access to rubric criteria
Step 2: Apply Rubric Categories
Score each category (1-10):
## Scoring Worksheet
### Category 1: Visual Aesthetics (25% weight)
#### 1.1 Color Usage (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
#### 1.2 Typography (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
#### 1.3 Layout & Composition (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
#### 1.4 Visual Hierarchy (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
#### 1.5 Polish & Detail (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
**Category Score**: (avg of above) = _/10
---
### Category 2: User Experience (25% weight)
#### 2.1 Usability (10%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
#### 2.2 Information Architecture (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
#### 2.3 User Flow (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
#### 2.4 Content Clarity (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
**Category Score**: _/10
---
### Category 3: Consistency & Systems (15% weight)
#### 3.1 Design System Adherence (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
#### 3.2 Component Consistency (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
#### 3.3 Spacing & Rhythm (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
**Category Score**: _/10
---
### Category 4: Responsiveness (15% weight)
#### 4.1 Mobile Design (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
#### 4.2 Tablet/Desktop Adaptation (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
#### 4.3 Cross-Platform Consistency (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
**Category Score**: _/10
---
### Category 5: Accessibility (10% weight)
#### 5.1 Color Accessibility (4%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
#### 5.2 Interactive Accessibility (3%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
#### 5.3 Content Accessibility (3%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
**Category Score**: _/10
---
### Category 6: Brand & Identity (10% weight)
#### 6.1 Brand Expression (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
#### 6.2 Emotional Design (5%)
Score: _/10
Rationale:
**Category Score**: _/10
Step 3: Calculate Final Score
Weighted calculation:
## Final Score Calculation
| Category | Score | Weight | Weighted |
|----------|-------|--------|----------|
| Visual Aesthetics | _/10 | × 0.25 | = _ |
| User Experience | _/10 | × 0.25 | = _ |
| Consistency | _/10 | × 0.15 | = _ |
| Responsiveness | _/10 | × 0.15 | = _ |
| Accessibility | _/10 | × 0.10 | = _ |
| Brand & Identity | _/10 | × 0.10 | = _ |
| **FINAL SCORE** | | | **_/10** |
### Quality Level
| Score Range | Level | Action |
|-------------|-------|--------|
| 9.0-10.0 | ✅ Excellent | Ready for delivery |
| 8.0-8.9 | Good | Minor polish needed |
| 7.0-7.9 | Average | Focused improvements |
| 6.0-6.9 | Below Average | Significant revision |
| <6.0 | Poor | Major rework required |
**Current Level**: [Level]
**Ready for Delivery**: [Yes/No]
Step 4: Gap Analysis
Identify improvement path:
## Gap Analysis
### Current State
- **Score**: [X/10]
- **Target**: 9.0/10
- **Gap**: [Y points]
### Weakest Categories (Focus Here)
1. **[Category with lowest score]**: [Score]/10
- Why it's low: [Explanation]
- To reach 9: [Specific improvements needed]
- Estimated effort: [Hours]
2. **[Second lowest category]**: [Score]/10
- Why it's low: [Explanation]
- To reach 9: [Specific improvements needed]
- Estimated effort: [Hours]
### Strongest Categories (Maintain)
1. **[Highest category]**: [Score]/10
- Keep: [What's working]
- Avoid: [What could reduce this]
### Impact Analysis
To reach 9.0:
- If we improve [Category 1] from [X] to 9: Final = [new score]
- If we improve [Category 2] from [X] to 9: Final = [new score]
- Most efficient path: [Which categories to focus on]
Example Input/Output
Example Input
**Design**: TaskFlow Dashboard v2
**Context**: Second iteration after addressing critical issues
Example Output
## Design Score Card: TaskFlow v2
**Date**: Current
**Iteration**: 2
**Previous Score**: 6.5/10
---
### Category Scores
#### Visual Aesthetics (25%)
| Subcategory | Score | Notes |
|-------------|-------|-------|
| Color Usage | 8/10 | Good palette, minor contrast issue in one badge |
| Typography | 7/10 | Improved hierarchy, line-height still tight |
| Layout | 8/10 | Grid now consistent, good whitespace |
| Hierarchy | 8/10 | Clear primary actions, good focal points |
| Polish | 7/10 | Much improved, some shadow inconsistencies |
| **Average** | **7.6/10** | |
#### User Experience (25%)
| Subcategory | Score | Notes |
|-------------|-------|-------|
| Usability | 8/10 | Flows are clear, one confusing state |
| Information Arch | 8/10 | Navigation logical, labels clear |
| User Flow | 8/10 | Task completion smooth |
| Content Clarity | 8/10 | Good copywriting, scannable |
| **Average** | **8.0/10** | |
#### Consistency (15%)
| Subcategory | Score | Notes |
|-------------|-------|-------|
| Design System | 8/10 | Following established patterns |
| Components | 8/10 | Cards consistent, buttons unified |
| Spacing | 7/10 | Mostly 8px scale, one section off |
| **Average** | **7.7/10** | |
#### Responsiveness (15%)
| Subcategory | Score | Notes |
|-------------|-------|-------|
| Mobile | 7/10 | Good but task list needs work |
| Desktop/Tablet | 8/10 | Well adapted |
| Cross-Platform | 8/10 | Consistent feel |
| **Average** | **7.7/10** | |
#### Accessibility (10%)
| Subcategory | Score | Notes |
|-------------|-------|-------|
| Color | 8/10 | Passes WCAG AA |
| Interactive | 7/10 | Focus states need enhancement |
| Content | 8/10 | Good semantics planned |
| **Average** | **7.7/10** | |
#### Brand & Identity (10%)
| Subcategory | Score | Notes |
|-------------|-------|-------|
| Brand Expression | 8/10 | Violet brand clear, differentiates |
| Emotional Design | 7/10 | Professional but could be warmer |
| **Average** | **7.5/10** | |
---
### Final Score Calculation
| Category | Score | Weight | Weighted |
|----------|-------|--------|----------|
| Visual Aesthetics | 7.6 | × 0.25 | 1.90 |
| User Experience | 8.0 | × 0.25 | 2.00 |
| Consistency | 7.7 | × 0.15 | 1.16 |
| Responsiveness | 7.7 | × 0.15 | 1.16 |
| Accessibility | 7.7 | × 0.10 | 0.77 |
| Brand & Identity | 7.5 | × 0.10 | 0.75 |
| **FINAL SCORE** | | | **7.74/10** |
### Quality Assessment
**Score**: 7.74/10 (+1.24 from v1)
**Level**: Average (approaching Good)
**Ready for Delivery**: ❌ No (target: 9.0)
**Gap to Target**: 1.26 points
---
### Gap Analysis
#### Progress Made 📈
- Visual hierarchy improved significantly
- Mobile design now exists
- Consistency much better
- Loading states added
#### Remaining Gaps to 9.0
**Priority 1: Brand & Identity (7.5 → 9.0)**
- Impact: +0.15 to final score
- Actions needed:
- Add warmer illustration/imagery
- Include delightful micro-interactions
- Strengthen empty states with personality
- Effort: 4 hours
**Priority 2: Visual Polish (7.6 → 9.0)**
- Impact: +0.35 to final score
- Actions needed:
- Fix typography line-heights
- Standardize all shadows
- Perfect border radius consistency
- Effort: 3 hours
**Priority 3: Accessibility (7.7 → 9.0)**
- Impact: +0.13 to final score
- Actions needed:
- Enhance focus states
- Add skip links
- Verify all touch targets
- Effort: 2 hours
**Priority 4: Responsiveness (7.7 → 9.0)**
- Impact: +0.20 to final score
- Actions needed:
- Refine mobile task list
- Test tablet landscape
- Effort: 3 hours
---
### Path to 9.0
**If all priorities addressed:**
- Visual: 7.6 → 9.0 (+1.4 × 0.25 = +0.35)
- Brand: 7.5 → 9.0 (+1.5 × 0.10 = +0.15)
- Accessibility: 7.7 → 9.0 (+1.3 × 0.10 = +0.13)
- Responsiveness: 7.7 → 9.0 (+1.3 × 0.15 = +0.20)
**Projected Score**: 7.74 + 0.83 = **8.57/10**
To reach 9.0, also need:
- UX improvements (+0.25 × 1.0 = +0.25)
- Consistency improvements (+0.15 × 1.3 = +0.20)
**Estimated total effort**: 12 hours
---
### Recommendation
**Next Iteration Focus** (Iteration 3):
1. Visual polish (biggest impact)
2. Responsiveness refinement
3. Accessibility enhancement
**Expected Score After Iteration 3**: 8.5-9.0/10
Prompts Library
Quick Score
Score this design quickly (1-10):
[DESIGN]
Provide:
- Overall score with one-line rationale
- Strongest category
- Weakest category
- One action to improve most
Category Deep-Dive
Score [DESIGN] deeply on [CATEGORY]:
For each subcategory:
1. Score (1-10)
2. Evidence/rationale
3. Specific improvement to reach 9
Progress Comparison
Compare scores between [VERSION 1] and [VERSION 2]:
1. Score comparison table
2. Improvements made
3. Regressions (if any)
4. Remaining work to 9/10
Success Criteria
Minimum Requirements
- All categories scored
- Final weighted score calculated
- Rationale provided for each score
- Gap to 9/10 identified
Quality Indicators
- Scores are calibrated consistently
- Rationale is specific, not vague
- Path to improvement is clear
- Effort estimates included
Related Skills
- Reference:
design_rubric.md- Full scoring criteria - Previous:
design_review.md- Qualitative review - Next:
design_iteration.md- Act on score gaps