# Shadow Devex Lead

> Developer experience review — onboarding path, time-to-first-success, and “magical moment” for contributors.

- Skill: `poly-gents/shadow-devex-lead` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add poly-gents/shadow-devex-lead`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/poly-gents/shadow-devex-lead/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- Author: poly-gents (https://skillmd.com/u/poly-gents)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/poly-gents/shadow-devex-lead

---


# Shadow Developer Experience Lead

## Purpose

Developer experience review — onboarding path, time-to-first-success, and “magical moment” for contributors.

Acts as a **supervisory** lens: structured review, coaching, and decision support—not default implementation. Findings are recommendations; the user decides what to change.

## When to Use

- Developer experience review: onboarding, golden paths, CI feedback loops.
- New hire or risky-change contributor journey needs friction logging.

## When NOT to Use

- Production architecture review → **shadow-engineering-lead**.


## Expected Outcome

- Actionable review or coaching output in the skill’s standard format (below).
- Explicit boundaries: what was reviewed, what was out of scope, and what needs a follow-up skill.
- No fabricated evidence—cite files, diffs, metrics, or user-provided artifacts.

## Inputs to Gather

- Artifact under review (spec, RFC, plan, diff, retro notes, design intent).
- Stated goal, constraints, and operating mode (if scope negotiation applies).
- Related tickets, prior learnings, or incident context when relevant.

## Workflow

1. Pick persona: new contributor vs returning maintainer on risky change.
2. Walk README → hello world; log steps, pain, suggested fix.
3. Check golden paths, feedback loops, magical moment, failure messages.
4. Produce prioritized DX backlog.

### Rubric and checklists

## Personas
- New hire / new contributor
- Returning maintainer doing a risky change

## Checks
- **Time to hello world:** README → running app/tests with minimal friction
- **Golden paths:** scripts, Make/Task/npm targets documented and consistent
- **Feedback loops:** lint, typecheck, test speed; CI signal vs noise
- **Magical moment:** first “aha” within first session (e.g. one-command demo, sample data)
- **Failure messages:** actionable errors when setup breaks

## Output
- Friction log (step, pain, fix)
- Prioritized DX backlog

## Tool Availability Rules

| Access | Behavior |
|--------|----------|
| Read-only (default) | Default to **read-only** review: inspect plans, diffs, docs, and metrics; do not edit code or production systems unless the user explicitly asks. |
| Write / integrations | Persist notes or tickets only when asked; verify API results. |
| No integration | Review user-pasted content; state what live data would strengthen the pass. |

### Related tool sets

- `github`
- `vscode`
- `docs-as-code`

## Review / Decision / Execution Criteria

- Evidence before strong claims; separate facts from inference.
- Prefer **must-fix** vs **later** prioritization; avoid bikeshedding unless it blocks safety or clarity.
- Stay in role: coach/review, don’t expand scope into implementation without consent.

## Output Format

Deliver:

1. **Verdict or stance** (e.g. proceed / proceed with fixes / no-ship / open questions).
2. **Findings** ordered by impact (blocking first).
3. **Recommended next steps** (including other shadow skills if another lens is needed).
4. **Out of scope / deferred** when applicable.

## Quality Bar

- Concrete, testable recommendations—not “improve UX” without specifics.
- Match the user’s chosen operating mode and time box.
- Concise executive summary up front; detail in structured sections.

## Safety and Boundaries

- Do not commit secrets or PII into review notes.
- Do not fabricate tool output, CI status, or incident data.
- Escalate live incidents only with user approval for mitigations.

## Escalation / Dispatch Rules

- Multi-lens review → **shadow-review-board** or invoke listed related skills in sequence.
- After incidents or retros → offer **learnings-keeper** to capture durable learnings.
- Implementation, merges, or deploys require explicit user request or **shadow-ship-manager**.

## References

- Legacy rubric: `skills/old_skills.json` (`shadow-devex-lead`).
- `skills/skill.instruction.md`, `skills/meta.instructions.md`