Frontend Quality Auditor

Frontend Quality Auditor

Use this skill to decide whether a frontend is ready to ship and what should be fixed first.

Core Contract

Produce a concise, evidence-based quality report. Do not redesign the product unless the user explicitly asks for fixes. The default output is an audit, not a rebuild.

Audit Workflow

1. Identify the project type, framework, entry routes, styling system, scripts, and available preview or deployment URL.
2. Inspect source structure first, then inspect rendered output when a browser or screenshot workflow is available.
3. Review desktop and mobile breakpoints before judging visual quality.
4. Check the launch-critical surfaces: hero or first screen, navigation, primary CTA, forms, media, interactive states, footer, error/loading/empty states, and any checkout, booking, pricing, or dashboard flows.
5. Classify issues by severity:
   • Blocker: likely broken, inaccessible, misleading, unusable, or launch-damaging.
   • High: visibly unprofessional, confusing, slow, fragile, or trust-reducing.
   • Medium: polish, consistency, or resilience issue worth fixing soon.
   • Low: minor refinement that should not block launch.
6. Recommend the smallest useful next action for each meaningful issue.
7. End with a clear Ship, Ship after fixes, or Do not ship yet judgment.

Review Areas

• Visual polish: hierarchy, spacing, typography, alignment, density, color, contrast, icon use, media treatment, empty space, and generic AI-looking patterns.
• Responsive behavior: mobile composition, tablet layout, overflow, touch targets, nav behavior, media crops, and text wrapping.
• Accessibility: semantic structure, headings, labels, focus states, keyboard paths, alt text, contrast, reduced motion, ARIA misuse, and modal/menu behavior.
• Performance: image and video weight, layout shift risk, font loading, animation cost, bundle hints, third-party scripts, and Core Web Vitals concerns.
• SEO and sharing basics: title, description, canonical, Open Graph, heading order, crawlable content, image alt text, sitemap/robots signals when relevant.
• Interaction quality: hover, focus, active, disabled, loading, error, success, offline, retry, and empty states.
• Content and trust: vague claims, placeholder copy, weak CTAs, unsupported proof, unclear pricing or contact flows, missing legal or support signals where expected.

Use Specialist Skills When Available

Route deep follow-up work to focused skills instead of bloating this audit:

• browser-inspection-workflow for rendered browser inspection and evidence capture.
• visual-polish-qa or responsive-visual-polish-qa for visual fixes.
• mobile-responsive-qa for phone and tablet layout issues.
• accessibility-audit-websites for detailed accessibility remediation.
• performance-audit-websites or performance-budget-lab for speed and Core Web Vitals.
• seo-technical-qa for launch SEO checks.
• cross-browser-qa for browser compatibility.
• anti-generic-website-review for generic AI output and weak design patterns.
• content-pruning-review, non-generic-web-copy, or cta-language-systems for copy and conversion clarity.

Output Format

Use this structure unless the user asks for something else:

1. Verdict: Ship, ship after fixes, or do not ship yet.
2. Top Risks: The 3-5 issues most likely to affect users or trust.
3. Findings: Severity, location, evidence, impact, and recommended fix.
4. Quick Wins: Small improvements with high visible payoff.
5. Specialist Follow-Ups: Which focused skills or checks should be run next.
6. Verification Notes: Commands, URLs, viewports, screenshots, and checks actually performed.

Read references/audit-checklist.md for the full checklist when performing a complete launch-readiness review.

Scope and evidence

Add insufficient evidence / not assessed when source-only or sampled evidence cannot support readiness. Qualify every verdict by surface and claimed stage. Recommendations remain recommendations in an analysis-only audit.