Ux Review
Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort
Example: Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications
Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks
Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance
Example: Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources
Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x
Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements
Example: Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors
Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort
Time estimate: 15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity
Prerequisites
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
epx add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill ux-reviewCompatible with
Supported agents
description: "Validates a UX spec, HUD design, or interaction pattern library for completeness, accessibility compliance, GDD alignment, and implementation readiness. Produces APPROVED / NEEDS REVISIO
argument-hint: "[file-path or 'all' or 'hud' or 'patterns']"
allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep
| name | ux-review |
| description | "Validates a UX spec, HUD design, or interaction pattern library for completeness, accessibility compliance, GDD alignment, and implementation readiness. Produces APPROVED / NEEDS REVISION / MAJOR REVISION NEEDED verdict with specific gaps." |
| argument-hint | "[file-path or 'all' or 'hud' or 'patterns']" |
| user-invocable | true |
| allowed-tools | Read, Glob, Grep |
| agent | ux-designer |
Validates UX design documents before they enter the implementation pipeline.
Acts as the quality gate between UX Design and Visual Design/Implementation in
the /team-ui pipeline.
Run this skill:
/ux-designui-programmer or art-directorVerdict levels:
/ux-review design/ux/inventory.md): validate
that one documentall: find all files in design/ux/ and validate eachhud: validate design/ux/hud.md specificallypatterns: validate design/ux/interaction-patterns.md specificallyFor all, output a summary table first (file | verdict | primary issue) then
full detail for each.
Before validating any spec, load:
.claude/docs/technical-preferences.md and
extract ## Input & Platform. This is the authoritative source for which input
methods the game supports — use it to drive the Input Method Coverage checks in
Phase 3A, not the spec's own header. If unconfigured, fall back to the spec header.design/accessibility-requirements.md
(if it exists)design/ux/interaction-patterns.md (if
it exists)design/player-journey.md (if it exists) for
context-arrival validationRun all checks against a ux-spec.md-based document.
Player Need Clarity
Completeness of States
Input Method Coverage
Data Architecture
Accessibility
accessibility-requirements.md is matched or exceededGDD Alignment
Pattern Library Consistency
Localization
Acceptance Criteria Quality
Run all checks against a hud-design.md-based document.
design/gdd/systems-index.md with UI category have
representation in HUD (or justified absence)## UX Review: [Document Name]
**Date**: [date]
**Reviewer**: ux-review skill
**Document**: [file path]
**Platform Target**: [from header]
**Accessibility Tier**: [from header or accessibility-requirements.md]
### Completeness: [X/Y sections present]
- [x] Purpose & Player Need
- [ ] States & Variants — MISSING: error state not documented
### Quality Issues: [N found]
1. **[Issue title]** [BLOCKING / ADVISORY]
- What's wrong: [specific description]
- Where: [section name]
- Fix: [specific action to take]
### GDD Alignment: [ALIGNED / GAPS FOUND]
- GDD [name] UI Requirements — [X/Y requirements covered]
- Missing: [list any uncovered GDD requirements]
### Accessibility: [COMPLIANT / GAPS / NON-COMPLIANT]
- Target tier: [tier]
- [list specific accessibility findings]
### Pattern Library: [CONSISTENT / INCONSISTENCIES FOUND]
- [findings]
### Verdict: APPROVED / NEEDS REVISION / MAJOR REVISION NEEDED
**Blocking issues**: [N] — must be resolved before implementation
**Advisory issues**: [N] — recommended but not blocking
[For APPROVED]: This spec is ready for handoff to `/team-ui` Phase 2
(Visual Design).
[For NEEDS REVISION]: Address the [N] blocking issues above, then re-run
`/ux-review`.
[For MAJOR REVISION NEEDED]: The spec has fundamental gaps in [areas].
Recommend returning to `/ux-design` to rework [sections].
This skill is READ-ONLY — it never edits or writes files. It reports findings only.
After delivering the verdict:
/team-ui to begin implementation coordination/ux-design with the
specific sections to reworkNever block the user from proceeding — the verdict is advisory. Document risks, present findings, let the user decide whether to proceed despite concerns. A user who chooses to proceed with a NEEDS REVISION spec takes on the documented risk.
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versionux-reviewExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
epx add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill ux-reviewFetches ux-review from Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
.cursor/skills/ux-review
Restart Cursor to activate ux-review. Access via /ux-reviewin your agent's command palette.
Learn more:View source on GitHubSkills CLI docsAbout CursorWhat are agent skills?
Steps
Common Pitfalls
✓ Do
✗ Don't
💡 Pro Tips
✓ Use when
Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.
asset-spec
Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios · Game Design · same repo
soak-test
Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios · Game QA & Testing · same repo
create-architecture
Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios · Game Dev Planning · same repo
compress
JuliusBrussee/caveman · Marketing · 2 shared tags
customer-persona-builder
whyashthakker/agent-skills-marketing · Marketing · 2 shared tags
testimonial-harvester
whyashthakker/agent-skills-marketing · Marketing · 2 shared tags
Useful defaults in ux-review — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
We added ux-review from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
Registry listing for ux-review matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
ux-review fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
ux-review has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
Keeps context tight: ux-review is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
ux-review is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
ux-review reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
Registry listing for ux-review matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: ux-review is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
showing 1-10 of 50