lyndonkl/design-evaluation-audit
skills/design-evaluation-audit/SKILL.md
Systematically evaluates existing designs against cognitive science principles using repeatable checklists, scoring rubrics, and severity-classified fix recommendations. Use when conducting design reviews or critiques, evaluating designs for cognitive alignment, performing quality assurance before launch, diagnosing usability issues, or choosing between design alternatives with objective criteria.
$ install --global
skillsauthnpx skillsauth add lyndonkl/claude design-evaluation-auditInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
Security Scan Results
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
3
Scanners Passed
9
Scanners in report
Clean
TrivyContainer and dependency vulnerability scanner
95%
Clean
SemgrepStatic code analysis for vulnerabilities
95%
Clean
mcp-scan (Snyk)Model Context Protocol security validation
95%
Skipped
Snyk (dep)Open source security scanning
50%
Skipped
Socket.devSupply chain security analysis
50%
Skipped
VirusTotalMulti-engine malware detection
50%
Skipped
CrowdStrikeAdvanced threat intelligence
50%
Skipped
OSV-ScannerOpen Source Vulnerability database check
50%
Skipped
OWASP Dep-Check
50%
Last scanned: Apr 20, 2026, 6:27 AM9.2s4 files scanned
SKILL.md
- name:
- design-evaluation-audit
- description:
- Systematically evaluates existing designs against cognitive science principles using repeatable checklists, scoring rubrics, and severity-classified fix recommendations. Use when conducting design reviews or critiques, evaluating designs for cognitive alignment, performing quality assurance before launch, diagnosing usability issues, or choosing between design alternatives with objective criteria.
Design Evaluation & Audit
Table of Contents
- Skill Boundaries
- Design Review Workflow
- Path Selection Menu
- Path 1: Run Cognitive Design Checklist
- Path 2: Run Visualization Audit
- Path 3: Combined Review
- Quick Reference
- Guardrails
Skill Boundaries
Use instead of this skill for:
- Creating new designs from scratch: use
cognitive-design - Learning cognitive theory: use
cognitive-designPath 1 - Detecting misleading visualizations: use
cognitive-fallacies-guard
Design Review Workflow
Time: 30-90 minutes depending on scope
Copy this checklist and track your progress:
Design Evaluation Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Systematic Assessment
- [ ] Step 2: Visualization Quality Audit (if applicable)
- [ ] Step 3: Severity Classification & Prioritization
- [ ] Step 4: Fix Recommendations
Step 1: Systematic Assessment
Apply the Cognitive Design Checklist across all 8 dimensions: Visibility, Visual Hierarchy, Chunking, Simplicity, Memory Support, Feedback, Consistency, Scanning Patterns. Check every item. Record pass/fail for each dimension with specific evidence.
Resource: Cognitive Design Checklist
Step 2: Visualization Quality Audit (if applicable)
If the design includes data visualizations, apply the 4-Criteria Visualization Audit. Score each criterion 1-5: Clarity, Efficiency, Integrity, Aesthetics. Calculate average and identify weakest dimension.
Resource: Visualization Audit Framework
Step 3: Severity Classification & Prioritization
Classify every finding by severity:
- CRITICAL: Integrity violations, accessibility failures, users cannot complete core tasks. Fix immediately.
- HIGH: Clarity/efficiency issues preventing use, missing feedback for critical actions, working memory overload (>10 ungrouped items). Fix before launch.
- MEDIUM: Suboptimal patterns, aesthetic issues, minor inconsistencies. Fix in next iteration.
- LOW: Minor optimizations, polish items. Fix when convenient.
Priority rule: Fix foundation-first — perception before coherence, integrity before aesthetics, critical before high.
Step 4: Fix Recommendations
For each finding, document:
- What is wrong — specific description with evidence
- Why it matters — which cognitive principle is violated
- How to fix — concrete, actionable recommendation
- Expected outcome — what improves after the fix
- Effort estimate — quick fix (minutes), moderate (hours), significant (days)
Verify fixes don't harm other dimensions.
Path Selection Menu
Path 1: Run Cognitive Design Checklist
Choose this when: Evaluating any interface, layout, content page, form, or general design.
What you'll get: Pass/fail across 8 cognitive dimensions, test methods, common failures, severity-classified findings.
Time: 20-40 minutes
→ Go to Cognitive Design Checklist
Path 2: Run Visualization Audit
Choose this when: Evaluating data visualizations — charts, graphs, dashboards, infographics.
What you'll get: 1-5 scores on Clarity, Efficiency, Integrity, Aesthetics with pass/fail threshold.
Time: 15-30 minutes per visualization
→ Go to Visualization Audit Framework
Path 3: Combined Review
Choose this when: Comprehensive review covering both interface elements and data visualizations.
Process: Run Cognitive Checklist first, then Visualization Audit on each data component, merge findings, produce unified fix list.
Time: 45-90 minutes
→ Start with Cognitive Checklist, then Visualization Audit
Quick Reference
3-Question Rapid Check
1. Attention — "Is it obvious what to look at first?"
- If NO: hierarchy and visibility issues
2. Memory — "Is the user required to remember anything that could be shown?"
- If NO: memory support and chunking issues
3. Clarity — "Can someone unfamiliar understand in 5 seconds?"
- If NO: simplicity and comprehension issues
All YES = likely cognitively sound. Any NO = run full checklist on the failing area.
Guardrails
Out of scope: Creating designs, teaching theory, providing domain guidance, replacing user testing, or covering full accessibility compliance.
In scope: Systematic evaluation against cognitive principles, severity-classified findings, prioritized fix recommendations, and visualization quality scoring.
Related Skills
lyndonkl/skills/advisory-edit
testing
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
--- name: advisory-edit description: A strict advisory-only editing discipline for a writer who dictates ("speaks out") essays and wants help WITHOUT having their voice changed. The editor directs structure, flags grammar, and suggests strategic language — but never modifies the writer's text unless the writer explicitly says "apply" / "make that change" / "rewrite this." Produces a line-referenced, suggestion-only critique where every item is marked the writer's call. Four passes: structural, l
112SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 3, 2026
lyndonkl/strategist-voice
testing
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Provides the house style for analyst-grade strategist writing — third-person register with sparing first-person, no em dashes, no "not X, not Y, not Z" negation cascades, numbered footnote citations rather than inline source parentheticals, specific opinion-signaling phrases, and topic-forward paragraph structure modeled on voice patterns observed in Damodaran's Musings on Markets and Thompson's Stratechery. Use when consolidating working notes into a finished long-form strategist or analyst report that must read as written by a senior human analyst rather than an AI assistant.
98SKILL.mdUpdated May 17, 2026
lyndonkl/markdown-to-pdf
testing
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Renders a markdown report to a PDF using pandoc with xelatex (11pt serif body, 1-inch margins, numbered footnotes, formal heading hierarchy). Requires a one-time install of pandoc and a LaTeX engine on the user's machine — basictex on macOS or texlive-xetex on Linux. Does not attempt automatic install. Fails loudly with the exact install commands if pandoc or xelatex is missing on the user's PATH. Use when producing a finished strategist or analyst report PDF from a polished markdown source.
98SKILL.mdUpdated May 17, 2026
lyndonkl/worked-example-walkthrough
testing
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Produces step-by-step computational walkthroughs of vector and matrix operations as a sequence of numbered "frames", showing the explicit state at each step. The text-equivalent of a 3Blue1Brown animation — each frame shows what changed and why, so the learner can re-trace the operation by hand. Use when the learner needs to *see* a computation unfold (eigenvalue computation, attention with 3 tokens, gradient descent step, SVD on a 2×2, layer norm on a 3-vector, softmax of a small input), when an explanation has been given but the learner needs to ground it in a worked example, or when introducing an operation that's intimidating in symbol form but trivial in pencil-and-paper form.
94SKILL.mdUpdated May 10, 2026