skills/product/ux-flow/SKILL.md
UX flow design and analysis. Creates user flow diagrams, interaction patterns, and information architecture. Generative — creates and maps flows rather than evaluating existing ones (see product/ux-review for evaluation). Use when: "user flow", "flow diagram", "interaction design", "information architecture", "IA mapping", "user journey map", "navigation design", "flow analysis"
npx skillsauth add mikeparcewski/wicked-garden ux-flowInstall 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.
Design and map user flows, interaction patterns, and information architecture. This skill is generative — it creates flows and IA structures from requirements or existing code, rather than evaluating whether a flow is good.
| Type | Purpose | Output | |------|---------|--------| | Task flow | Single task, one path | Linear diagram | | User flow | Multiple paths, decision points | Branching diagram | | Screen flow | UI states per step | Annotated screens | | System flow | Front-end + back-end | Swimlane diagram |
[Start] → [Login Page]
↓
{Credentials valid?}
/ \
Yes No
↓ ↓
[Dashboard] [Error Msg] → [Retry]
↓
{Has onboarding?}
/ \
Yes No
↓ ↓
[Setup Flow] [Home]
flowchart TD
A[Start] --> B[Login Page]
B --> C{Valid?}
C -->|Yes| D[Dashboard]
C -->|No| E[Error State]
E --> B
D --> F{New user?}
F -->|Yes| G[Onboarding]
F -->|No| H[Home]
When analyzing an existing flow:
From requirements or code, extract:
App Root
├── Auth
│ ├── Login
│ ├── Register
│ └── Password Reset
├── Dashboard (requires auth)
│ ├── Overview
│ └── Widgets
└── Settings (requires auth)
├── Profile
├── Notifications
└── Security
Common patterns and when to use them:
| Pattern | Use Case | |---------|----------| | Modal dialog | Focused action, doesn't lose context | | Slide-over panel | Editing without navigation | | Inline edit | Simple field edits | | Full-page form | Complex data entry | | Wizard | Multi-step, sequential | | Accordion | Progressive disclosure | | Tab set | Peer-level content switching |
## UX Flow: {feature or page}
### Overview
{1–2 sentences: what the flow accomplishes}
### Information Architecture
{IA tree or description}
### User Flow
{ASCII or Mermaid diagram}
### Step-by-Step
1. User arrives at {entry point}
2. {action} → {system response}
3. {decision} → {branch A / branch B}
...
### Edge Cases
- **Empty state**: {what shows when no data}
- **Error state**: {what shows on failure, recovery path}
- **Loading state**: {feedback during async ops}
### Open Questions
- {question requiring product/stakeholder input}
development
Pattern-conformance agent-half: evaluates a produced artifact or diff against a set of architectural/design pattern rules from the conformance-rule store (wicked_governance schema). Returns structured findings with rule ID, severity, and rationale — the deterministic half (mechanical rule recall) is done by the guard pipeline; this is the semantic evaluation step. Triggered by: the guard_pipeline `outgov_pattern` check (session-close), or explicitly by an engineering review when WICKED_OUTGOV_RULES_DIR is populated. NOT a replacement for the full `engineering` review skill — focuses only on conformance to stored Pattern rules; architecture and code-quality checks live in the `engineering` skill. Semantic evaluation reuses `wicked-garden-qe-semantic-reviewer` as the designated agent-half evaluator (per garden#983 spec). This skill is the orchestrating wrapper that loads applicable Pattern rules and delegates the per-rule semantic judgment to qe-semantic-reviewer.
tools
The FOUNDATIONAL domain-model capability: extract a codebase's domain — testable business rules (with confidence + provenance), entities, requirements — as a schema-conformant model on the estate graph. The workers annotate the store; wicked-core reads it and builds the requirements graph, coverage-gating fail-closed. Steers three fork workers. A shared substrate, not a modernization tool. The `modernize` archetype DERIVES from it; build / migrate / review / specify / explore consume the SAME domain model — none OWN it. Understanding a codebase's domain is upstream of almost everything else garden does. Use when: "extract the business rules / domain model from this codebase", "build a requirements graph from the code", "what does this system actually require", "reverse-engineer the domain before we build/port/migrate". Works on ANY codebase (modern or legacy) — the value is the domain model, not the porting. NOT the code transform itself (that is the archetype consuming this model). This skill produces the DOMAIN MODEL, not new code.
development
Domain-graph fork worker for the modernize archetype. Groups the estate's Louvain communities into business domains, attaches each requirement to its cluster (advisory cluster_id provenance), and invokes wicked-core's domain-graph build (which reads the annotated estate store, recomputes coverage fail-closed, and builds the requirements graph) — then validates core's output against the vendored schema. Use when: dispatched by wicked-garden-domain after rule extraction to turn a flat rule set into cluster-keyed domains; "group these into domains", "build the requirements graph", "translate clusters into a domain model". NOT for mining the rules themselves (that is domain-extractor) or threat-modeling (that is domain-coverage).
tools
Rule-extraction fork worker for the FOUNDATIONAL domain-model capability. Mines testable business rules from a codebase — each with a numeric confidence and a provenance{source, ref, source_kinds} — and annotates them into the estate store so wicked-core can build the domain-model requirements graph (coverage-gated). This is a substrate, not a modernization tool: the `modernize` archetype DERIVES from it, and build / migrate / review / specify / explore can consume the same domain model — none OWN it. Use when: dispatched by wicked-garden-domain to mine the business_rules of a codebase (or a module); "extract the domain rules", "what does this system require", building the requirements half of a domain model. NOT for grouping into domains (that is domain-modeler) or judging coverage (that is domain-coverage — a seat-distinct evaluator).