Reviewux

UX Review

Performs a UX review optimized for productivity tools and admin interfaces. Based on the principle: "Hands stay on keyboard, mouse is optional."

This review evaluates features against efficiency-first UX patterns used in best-in-class productivity tools: command palettes, keyboard-first navigation, inline editing, optimistic UI, and minimal context switching.

When to use

Use this skill when the user needs to:

• Validate that a feature feels fast and professional
• Check if keyboard shortcuts and command palette are properly integrated
• Verify inline editing vs unnecessary page transitions
• Ensure optimistic UI and instant feedback
• Review a feature for "pro tool" experience quality

Core UX Principles

The interface should think faster than the user

1. Command Palette — single entry point for all actions (⌘K / Ctrl+K)
2. Keyboard-First — frequent actions have shortcuts, arrow navigation works
3. Inline Editing — no modals for simple edits, Enter saves, Esc cancels
4. Minimal States — side panels over pages, overlays without context loss
5. Search-First — search is the primary navigation method
6. Strong Defaults — zero decisions needed for common actions
7. Optimistic UI — instant response, no spinners when avoidable
8. List-Centric — lists as main screens, saved views, fast filters
9. Context > Settings — actions next to objects, not buried in settings
10. Visual Clarity — no noise, color = meaning only

Instructions

Step 1: Determine Review Target

Parse $0 to determine what to review:

1. Spec name — if provided, read documents from .specs/<spec-name>/ (requirements, design, tasks)
2. File paths — if provided, review specific files or directories
3. Branch diff — if branch is specified, review all changes on the current branch vs main

If no arguments provided:

1. Check if there are specs in .specs/ and list them
2. Check if there are uncommitted changes or branch changes
3. Ask the user what to review

Step 2: Gather Context

Read all available materials depending on the target:

From spec documents (if available):

• requirements.md — extract user stories, acceptance criteria, and described user flows
• design.md — extract UI components, data flow diagrams, and interaction patterns

From codebase:

Use parallel sub-agents (subagent_type: "Explore") to investigate:

1. Command palette agent — find command palette implementation, registered commands, keyboard shortcut definitions
2. UI patterns agent — find forms, dialogs, pages, lists; identify inline editing vs modal patterns
3. Navigation agent — find route definitions, side panels, drawers, overlay patterns
4. Feedback agent — find optimistic updates, loading states, toast notifications, undo mechanisms

Launch all four agents in a single message (parallel tool calls).

Step 3: Evaluate Efficiency-First Patterns

For each pattern, evaluate the current implementation level:

3a. Command & Control

3b. Editing & Data Entry

3c. Navigation & Context

3d. Feedback & Performance

3e. Visual Design

Step 4: Cross-Reference with Spec

If spec documents are available, verify:

1. Keyboard flows documented — spec mentions keyboard shortcuts and navigation
2. Inline editing specified — design prefers inline over modal where appropriate
3. Performance requirements — response time and optimistic UI mentioned
4. Command palette integration — new actions registered in command palette

Step 5: Generate UX Review Report

Present a structured report:

# UX Review: [Feature Name]

**Scope:** [What was reviewed — spec docs, files, branch diff]
**UX Maturity:** [🚀 Pro-tool / ✅ Good / ⚠️ Basic / ❌ Needs Work]

---

## Efficiency-First Assessment

### Command & Control
| Pattern | Level | Evidence |
|---------|-------|----------|
| Command Palette | [emoji] | [What was found] |
| Keyboard Shortcuts | [emoji] | [What was found] |
| Focus Management | [emoji] | [What was found] |

### Editing & Data Entry
| Pattern | Level | Evidence |
|---------|-------|----------|
| Inline Editing | [emoji] | [What was found] |
| Strong Defaults | [emoji] | [What was found] |
| Form Efficiency | [emoji] | [What was found] |

### Navigation & Context
| Pattern | Level | Evidence |
|---------|-------|----------|
| Minimal States | [emoji] | [What was found] |
| Search-First | [emoji] | [What was found] |
| List-Centric | [emoji] | [What was found] |

### Feedback & Performance
| Pattern | Level | Evidence |
|---------|-------|----------|
| Optimistic UI | [emoji] | [What was found] |
| Response Time | [emoji] | [What was found] |
| Undo/Redo | [emoji] | [What was found] |

### Visual Design
| Pattern | Level | Evidence |
|---------|-------|----------|
| Visual Clarity | [emoji] | [What was found] |
| Context > Settings | [emoji] | [What was found] |
| Information Density | [emoji] | [What was found] |

---

## 🔴 Critical Issues

> Blocks keyboard users or forces unnecessary navigation

### [Issue Title]
**Pattern violated:** [Which efficiency pattern]
**Location:** `path/to/component.tsx`

[What the user experiences and why it slows them down]

**Fix:** [Specific recommendation]

---

## 🟠 Friction Points

> Slows down power users

- **[Location]** — [What's slow and why]
- **[Location]** — [What's slow and why]

---

## 🟡 Polish Opportunities

> Would elevate to pro-tool level

- [Opportunity 1]
- [Opportunity 2]

---

## ✅ What's Already Great

- [Positive finding 1]
- [Positive finding 2]

---

## Edge Cases

| Scenario | Status | Notes |
|----------|--------|-------|
| Empty state | [emoji] | [Has CTA? Keyboard accessible?] |
| Error state | [emoji] | [Dismissible? Undo available?] |
| Loading state | [emoji] | [Skeleton? Optimistic?] |
| Bulk operations | [emoji] | [Keyboard select? Batch actions?] |

---

## Quick Wins

> Low effort, high impact improvements

1. [ ] [Quick win 1]
2. [ ] [Quick win 2]
3. [ ] [Quick win 3]

---

## Summary

| Category | Score |
|----------|-------|
| Command & Control | [X/3 patterns at Good+] |
| Editing & Data Entry | [X/3 patterns at Good+] |
| Navigation & Context | [X/3 patterns at Good+] |
| Feedback & Performance | [X/3 patterns at Good+] |
| Visual Design | [X/3 patterns at Good+] |
| **Overall** | [X/15 patterns at Good+] |

Step 6: Offer Next Steps

After presenting the report, offer actions:

1. Add keyboard shortcuts — help implement missing shortcuts
2. Convert to inline editing — refactor modals to inline patterns
3. Add to command palette — register new actions in ⌘K
4. Implement optimistic UI — add optimistic updates for slow operations
5. Re-review — run the review again after changes

Severity Levels

Arguments

• $ARGUMENTS - Spec name, file paths, or review scope
  • <spec-name> — review UX based on spec documents and related code
  • <file-path> — review UX of specific files or directories
  • branch — review UX of all changes on current branch vs main

Examples:

• review:ux user-auth — review UX for the user-auth feature spec
• review:ux src/pages/settings/ — review UX of the settings pages
• review:ux branch — review UX of all UI changes on the current branch

Source: ikatsuba/skills — distributed by TomeVault.