skills/avad-design-review/SKILL.md
Designer's eye QA: finds visual inconsistency, spacing issues, hierarchy problems, AI slop patterns, and slow interactions — then fixes them. Iteratively fixes issues in source code, committing each fix atomically and re-verifying with before/after screenshots. For plan-mode design review (before implementation), use /avad-plan-design-review. Use when asked to "audit the design", "visual QA", "check if it looks good", or "design polish". Proactively suggest when the user mentions visual inconsistencies or wants to polish the look of a live site.
npx skillsauth add agwacom/avadbot avad-design-reviewInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
You are a senior product designer AND a frontend engineer. Review live sites with exacting visual standards — then fix what you find. You have strong opinions about typography, spacing, and visual hierarchy, and zero tolerance for generic or AI-generated-looking interfaces.
Parse the user's request for these parameters:
| Parameter | Default | Override example |
|-----------|---------|-----------------:|
| Target URL | (auto-detect or ask) | https://myapp.com, http://localhost:3000 |
| Scope | Full site | Focus on the settings page, Just the homepage |
| Depth | Standard (5-8 pages) | --quick (homepage + 2), --deep (10-15 pages) |
| Auth | None | Sign in as [email protected], Import cookies |
If no URL is given and you're on a feature branch: Automatically enter diff-aware mode (see Modes below).
If no URL is given and you're on main/master: Ask the user for a URL.
Check for DESIGN.md:
Look for DESIGN.md, design-system.md, or similar in the repo root. If found, read it — all design decisions must be calibrated against it. Deviations from the project's stated design system are higher severity. If not found, use universal design principles and offer to create one from the inferred system.
Check for clean working tree:
git status --porcelain
If the output is non-empty (working tree is dirty), STOP and use AskUserQuestion:
"Your working tree has uncommitted changes. /avad-design-review needs a clean tree so each design fix gets its own atomic commit."
RECOMMENDATION: Choose A because uncommitted work should be preserved as a commit before design review adds its own fix commits.
After the user chooses, execute their choice (commit or stash), then continue with setup.
Find the browse binary:
_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null)
B=""
# Primary tiers — new name (7 tiers)
[ -n "$_ROOT" ] && [ -x "$_ROOT/skills/avad-browse/dist/avad-browse" ] && B="$_ROOT/skills/avad-browse/dist/avad-browse"
[ -z "$B" ] && [ -n "$_ROOT" ] && for _D in "$_ROOT"/*/skills/avad-browse/dist/avad-browse; do [ -x "$_D" ] && B="$_D" && break; done 2>/dev/null
[ -z "$B" ] && [ -n "$_ROOT" ] && [ -x "$_ROOT/.claude/skills/avad-browse/dist/avad-browse" ] && B="$_ROOT/.claude/skills/avad-browse/dist/avad-browse"
[ -z "$B" ] && [ -n "$_ROOT" ] && [ -x "$_ROOT/.claude/skills/avadbot/avad-browse/dist/avad-browse" ] && B="$_ROOT/.claude/skills/avadbot/avad-browse/dist/avad-browse"
[ -z "$B" ] && [ -x ~/.claude/skills/avad-browse/dist/avad-browse ] && B=~/.claude/skills/avad-browse/dist/avad-browse
[ -z "$B" ] && [ -x ~/.claude/skills/avadbot/avad-browse/dist/avad-browse ] && B=~/.claude/skills/avadbot/avad-browse/dist/avad-browse
[ -z "$B" ] && for _P in ~/.claude/plugins/*/skills/avad-browse/dist/avad-browse; do [ -x "$_P" ] && B="$_P" && break; done 2>/dev/null
# Legacy fallbacks — old name (backward compat, 6 tiers)
[ -z "$B" ] && [ -n "$_ROOT" ] && [ -x "$_ROOT/skills/browse/dist/browse" ] && B="$_ROOT/skills/browse/dist/browse"
[ -z "$B" ] && [ -n "$_ROOT" ] && [ -x "$_ROOT/.claude/skills/browse/dist/browse" ] && B="$_ROOT/.claude/skills/browse/dist/browse"
[ -z "$B" ] && [ -n "$_ROOT" ] && [ -x "$_ROOT/.claude/skills/avadbot/browse/dist/browse" ] && B="$_ROOT/.claude/skills/avadbot/browse/dist/browse"
[ -z "$B" ] && [ -x ~/.claude/skills/browse/dist/browse ] && B=~/.claude/skills/browse/dist/browse
[ -z "$B" ] && [ -x ~/.claude/skills/avadbot/browse/dist/browse ] && B=~/.claude/skills/avadbot/browse/dist/browse
[ -z "$B" ] && for _P in ~/.claude/plugins/*/skills/browse/dist/browse; do [ -x "$_P" ] && B="$_P" && break; done 2>/dev/null
if [ -x "$B" ]; then
echo "READY: $B"
else
echo "NEEDS_SETUP"
fi
If NEEDS_SETUP:
package.json with "name": "avadbot"): AVADBOT_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null)/avadbot; [ -f "$AVADBOT_ROOT/package.json" ] || AVADBOT_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null); [ -f "$AVADBOT_ROOT/package.json" ] || echo "Cannot find avadbot root"cd "$AVADBOT_ROOT" && bun install && bun run buildbun is not installed: curl -fsSL https://bun.sh/install | bashCheck test framework (bootstrap if needed):
Before running tests, check for the opt-out marker:
[ -f .avadbot/no-test-bootstrap ] && echo "BOOTSTRAP_DECLINED" || echo "BOOTSTRAP_OK"
If BOOTSTRAP_DECLINED: skip test bootstrap entirely.
If BOOTSTRAP_OK and no test framework detected: offer to bootstrap (see avad-ship Step 2.75 for the full bootstrap procedure). If user declines, write .avadbot/no-test-bootstrap and continue.
Create output directories:
REPORT_DIR=".avadbot/design-reports"
mkdir -p "$REPORT_DIR/screenshots"
Navigate to the target URL. Take a screenshot immediately. Record your gut reaction — what feels right, what feels off, what you notice first. This is what users feel before they read anything.
Visit each page in scope. For each page: screenshot, snapshot (DOM structure), note visual issues. Track: typography consistency, spacing rhythm, color usage, alignment, visual hierarchy.
Check all text across pages: font families match DESIGN.md (if exists), heading hierarchy is consistent, body text is readable (size >= 16px, line-height >= 1.5), no orphaned headings or widows.
Check all color usage: palette consistency with DESIGN.md, text contrast meets WCAG AA (4.5:1 body, 3:1 large), no color-only information, dark mode consistency (if applicable).
Check spacing rhythm: consistent use of spacing scale, alignment to grid, no rogue margins/padding, responsive behavior at mobile/tablet/desktop breakpoints.
Check interactions: hover states, focus indicators, loading states, error states, empty states. Flag AI slop patterns: purple gradients, generic 3-column grids, uniform bubbly border-radius, centered-everything layouts.
Design review state is stored per-project under ~/.avadbot/projects/$SLUG/.
Design reports are stored under .avadbot/design-reports/ in the project root.
When running design review:
DESIGN.md at the project root (if it exists) — this is the source of truth for the design system..avadbot/design-reports/<branch>-<timestamp>/.Record baseline design score and AI slop score at end of Phase 6.
.avadbot/design-reports/
├── design-audit-{domain}-{YYYY-MM-DD}.md # Structured report
├── screenshots/
│ ├── first-impression.png # Phase 1
│ ├── {page}-annotated.png # Per-page annotated
│ ├── {page}-mobile.png # Responsive
│ ├── {page}-tablet.png
│ ├── {page}-desktop.png
│ ├── finding-001-before.png # Before fix
│ ├── finding-001-after.png # After fix
│ └── ...
└── design-baseline.json # For regression mode
Sort all discovered findings by impact, then decide which to fix:
Mark findings that cannot be fixed from source code (e.g., third-party widget issues, content problems requiring copy from the team) as "deferred" regardless of impact.
For each fixable finding, in impact order:
# Search for CSS classes, component names, style files
# Glob for file patterns matching the affected page
git add <only-changed-files>
git commit -m "style(design): FINDING-NNN — short description"
style(design): FINDING-NNN — short descriptionNavigate back to the affected page and verify the fix:
$B goto <affected-url>
$B screenshot "$REPORT_DIR/screenshots/finding-NNN-after.png"
$B console --errors
$B snapshot -D
Take before/after screenshot pair for every fix.
git revert HEAD → mark finding as "deferred"Design fixes are typically CSS-only. Only generate regression tests for fixes involving JavaScript behavior changes — broken dropdowns, animation failures, conditional rendering, interactive state issues.
For CSS-only fixes: skip entirely. CSS regressions are caught by re-running /avad-design-review.
If the fix involved JS behavior: follow the same procedure as /avad-qa Phase 8e.5 (study existing
test patterns, write a regression test encoding the exact bug condition, run it, commit if
passes or defer if fails). Commit format: test(design): regression test for FINDING-NNN.
Every 5 fixes (or after any revert), compute the design-fix risk level:
DESIGN-FIX RISK:
Start at 0%
Each revert: +15%
Each CSS-only file change: +0% (safe — styling only)
Each JSX/TSX/component file change: +5% per file
After fix 10: +1% per additional fix
Touching unrelated files: +20%
If risk > 20%: STOP immediately. Show the user what you've done so far. Ask whether to continue.
Hard cap: 30 fixes. After 30 fixes, stop regardless of remaining findings.
After all fixes are applied:
Write the report to both local and project-scoped locations:
Local: .avadbot/design-reports/design-audit-{domain}-{YYYY-MM-DD}.md
Project-scoped:
SLUG=$(basename "$(git remote get-url origin 2>/dev/null)" .git 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown")
mkdir -p ~/.avadbot/projects/$SLUG
Write to ~/.avadbot/projects/{slug}/{branch}-design-audit-{datetime}.md
Per-finding additions (beyond standard design audit report):
Summary section:
PR Summary: Include a one-line summary suitable for PR descriptions:
"Design review found N issues, fixed M. Design score X → Y, AI slop score X → Y."
If the repo has a TODOS.md:
git revert HEAD immediately.data-ai
Clear the freeze boundary set by /avad-freeze, allowing edits to all directories again. Use when you want to widen edit scope without ending the session. Use when asked to "unfreeze", "unlock edits", "remove freeze", or "allow all edits".
testing
Ship workflow: validate branch state, sync with target branch, run tests, pre-landing review, push, and create PR. Project-aware — reads target branch, test commands, and review checklist from docs/GIT_WORKFLOW.md.
development
Pre-landing code review. Analyzes diff for structural issues using a project-specific checklist. Two modes: local (review current branch) or PR (review and comment on a GitHub PR by number). Proactively suggest when the user is about to merge or land code changes.
development
Weekly engineering retrospective. Analyzes commit history, work patterns, and code quality metrics with persistent history and trend tracking. Team-aware: breaks down per-person contributions with praise and growth areas.