FrancoStino/ui-score

Design Score

When to Use

Use this skill when you need score a UI file's design quality 0-100 against StyleSeed's design language — per-category breakdown, the worst offenders, and a prioritized fix list. A quantified version of /ss-review.

/ss-review tells you what's wrong. /ss-score tells you how good it is overall and what to fix first — a single number plus a category breakdown, so you can track UI quality like you track test coverage.

When NOT to use

• For a quick pass/fail before committing → use /ss-lint
• For a full prose audit with fixes → use /ss-review
• For non-UI files (logic, config) — scoring is meaningless

What to score

Score the file (or each file in a directory) on six weighted categories that map to the design language. Total = 100.

| Category | Weight | Reads from | |---|---|---| | Color discipline | 18 | DESIGN-LANGUAGE §1, §18, §72 + VISUAL-CRAFT §C4 | | Hierarchy & typography | 18 | §2, §3, §4, §16 + Font Size table + VISUAL-CRAFT §C2 | | Layout & rhythm | 14 | §13, §14, §15, §61 + VISUAL-CRAFT §C1 | | Cards & elevation | 12 | §7, §8, §12, §1 + VISUAL-CRAFT §C3 | | States & a11y | 18 | §11, §70, §71, §72 + VISUAL-CRAFT §C3 | | Motion & interaction | 8 | §24, §59 + engine/motion | | Coherence | 12 | VISUAL-CRAFT §C0 (one choice per axis) |

How to score each category

For each category, start at full marks and subtract for violations you find by reading the code. Be specific and evidence-based — cite the line.

Color discipline (20) — deduct for: any #000/text-black (−4 each, cap −8); more than one accent hue used decoratively (−5); emoji used as UI icons (multi-color, breaks single accent) (−5); a normal/OK/"보통" state shown in a status color instead of neutral grey (−4); status color on most/every row (no severity hierarchy) (−4); decorative hues (gold stars, rainbow category dots) instead of accent/grey (−3); hardcoded hex where a semantic token exists (−2 each, cap −6); status conveyed by color alone (−4).

Hierarchy & typography (20) — deduct for: number/unit not ~2:1 (−4); font sizes off the Font Size table / text-[var(--…)] for size (−5); everything the same weight, no clear primary (−5); cramped or wrong line-height on body (−3).

Layout & rhythm (15) — deduct for: content on bare background, not in cards (−6); px-4/px-8/mx-4 instead of px-6/mx-6 (−3); same section type repeated in a row (−4); no space-y-6 rhythm (−3).

Cards & elevation (15) — deduct for: 1px borders doing separation work that tone+shadow should (−4); shadows over ~8% opacity / visibly heavy (−4); no card/background tone separation (−5).

States & a11y (20) — deduct for: missing empty/loading/error state on a data surface (−5 each, cap −10); contrast below 4.5:1 body / 3:1 large (−6); touch target < 44px (−4); no visible focus / outline:none (−5); icon-only control without aria-label (−3).

Motion & interaction (8) — deduct for: random/ad-hoc fades instead of a named seed/keyword (−3); motion that delays content or blocks an action (−4); no prefers-reduced-motion handling on custom motion (−3); scroll-linked/parallax (forbidden, §59) (−5).

Coherence (12) — the "one choice per axis" laws (VISUAL-CRAFT §C0). Deduct for each axis that is mixed rather than unified across the file: mixed radius personalities, e.g. sharp panel + pill buttons (−5); two+ competing accent hues used for emphasis (−4); mixed shadow languages / light directions (−3); mixed icon families, fill modes, or stroke weights (−3); same radius on a nested element instead of inner = outer − padding (−2); inconsistent control heights for buttons/inputs (−2). This is the category that most predicts "looks AI-generated" — weight evidence of system-wide consistency, not per-component prettiness.

Clamp each category at 0. Sum to a total.

Output format

## Design Score: 70 / 100   (src/app/Dashboard.tsx)

████████████████░░░░░░  C-

Color discipline      13/18   ▓▓▓░  #000 headings (l.12,40); orange+blue+green accents (l.28-34)
Hierarchy & typography 15/18  ▓▓▓▓  number/unit 1:1 on hero (l.18)
Layout & rhythm        11/14  ▓▓▓░  two identical KPI rows (l.22-31)
Cards & elevation       8/12  ▓▓░░  1px borders doing separation (l.22)
States & a11y          11/18  ▓▓░░  no empty/loading state; focus ring missing (l.55)
Motion & interaction    6/8   ▓▓▓░  default fade, not a named seed
Coherence               6/12  ▓▓░░  sharp cards (l.22) + pill buttons (l.48); 3 accent hues (§C0)

### Fix first (highest score gain)
1. Add empty + loading states to the orders list       → +7 states (§71)
2. Unify radius (pick soft 8-12px) + collapse to one accent → +9 coherence+color (§C0, §2)
3. Drop the 1px borders, use tone + ≤8% shadow         → +4 cards  (§7)

Re-score after: ~92 / 100.

Use letter bands: 90+ A · 80-89 B · 70-79 C · 60-69 D · <60 F.

Gate mode (use this as the Quality Gate before showing the user UI)

The Quality Gate (CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md) is /ss-score run as a loop, not a one-off:

1. Score the just-generated UI.
2. If < 80, apply the "fix first" list (use /ss-review to make the edits), then re-score.
3. Repeat up to ~3×, or until ≥ 80.
4. Present the UI with the final score and a one-line "fixed: …".

The pass bar is a floor, not a ceiling — get to ≥ 80 and stop; don't chase 100. The point is that no first-draft, obviously-incoherent UI reaches the user. Especially never ship below 80 with a rainbow status list, emoji icons, two accents, or missing states — those are the exact tells the gate exists to catch.

Rules

• Read the file — score from real evidence (line numbers), never guess.
• Order the "fix first" list by score gain, not by severity alone — the goal is the fastest path to a better number.
• For a directory, print a one-line score per file, then the lowest-scoring file's full breakdown.
• Don't auto-edit in plain scoring. /ss-score measures; /ss-review and /ss-motion fix. In Gate mode (above) you do fix-and-re-score until the floor is met.
• As a gate, ≥ 80 is a floor before showing the user — but don't over-polish: chasing 95→100 to delay shipping is worse than shipping a clean 85.

Limitations

• Use this skill only when the task clearly matches its upstream source and local project context.
• Verify commands, generated code, dependencies, credentials, and external service behavior before applying changes.
• Do not treat examples as a substitute for environment-specific tests, security review, or user approval for destructive or costly actions.