pbakaus/impeccable4 files

Critique

Evaluate design from a UX perspective, assessing visual hierarchy, information architecture, emotional resonance, cognitive load, and overall quality with quantitative scoring, persona-based testing, automated anti-pattern detection, and actionable feedback. Use when the user asks to review, critique, evaluate, or give feedback on a design or component.

Specification
Skill ID
pbakaus/impeccable/critique
Publisher
pbakaus
Repository
impeccable
Installs
0
Files
4
Synced
Sep 16, 2026
How to use it

Open any RiverX project, open the Skills panel in the chat, and search for this identifier. The files are fetched from the source repository at install time.

pbakaus/impeccable/critiqueInstalls these files
  • SKILL.md
  • reference/cognitive-load.md
  • reference/heuristics-scoring.md
  • reference/personas.md

What this skill tells the agent

STEPS

Step 1: Preparation

Invoke /impeccable, which contains design principles, anti-patterns, and the Context Gathering Protocol. Follow the protocol before proceeding. If no design context exists yet, you MUST run /impeccable teach first. Additionally gather: what the interface is trying to accomplish.

Step 2: Gather Assessments

Launch two independent assessments. Neither must see the other's output to avoid bias.

You SHOULD delegate each assessment to a separate sub-agent for independence. Use your environment's agent spawning mechanism (e.g., Claude Code's Agent tool, or Codex's subagent spawning). Sub-agents should return their findings as structured text. Do NOT output findings to the user yet.

If sub-agents are not available in the current environment, complete each assessment sequentially, writing findings to internal notes before proceeding.

Tab isolation: When browser automation is available, each assessment MUST create its own new tab. Never reuse an existing tab, even if one is already open at the correct URL. This prevents the two assessments from interfering with each other's page state.

Assessment A: LLM Design Review

Read the relevant source files (HTML, CSS, JS/TS) and, if browser automation is available, visually inspect the live page. Create a new tab for this; do not reuse existing tabs. After navigation, label the tab by setting the document title:

document.title = '[LLM] ' + document.title;

Think like a design director. Evaluate:

AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL): Does this look like every other AI-generated interface? Review against ALL DON'T guidelines in the impeccable skill. Check for AI color palette, gradient text, dark glows, glassmorphism, hero metric layouts, identical card grids, generic fonts, and all other tells. The test: If someone said "AI made this," would you believe them immediately?

Holistic Design Review: visual hierarchy (eye flow, primary action clarity), information architecture (structure, grouping, cognitive load), emotional resonance (does it match brand and audience?), discoverability (are interactive elements obvious?), composition (balance, whitespace, rhythm), typography (hierarchy, readability, font choices), color (purposeful use, cohesion, accessibility), states & edge cases (empty, loading, error, success), microcopy (clarity, tone, helpfulness).

Cognitive Load (consult cognitive-load):

  • Run the 8-item cognitive load checklist. Report failure count: 0-1 = low (good), 2-3 = moderate, 4+ = critical.
  • Count visible options at each decision point. If >4, flag it.
  • Check for progressive disclosure: is complexity revealed only when needed?

Emotional Journey:

  • What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
  • Peak-end rule: Is the most intense moment positive? Does the experience end well?
  • Emotional valleys: Check for anxiety spikes at high-stakes moments (payment, delete, commit). Are there design interventions (progress indicators, reassurance copy, undo options)?

Nielsen's Heuristics (consult heuristics-scoring): Score each of the 10 heuristics 0-4. This scoring will be presented in the report.

Return structured findings covering: AI slop verdict, heuristic scores, cognitive load assessment, what's working (2-3 items), priority issues (3-5 with what/why/fix), minor observations, and provocative questions.

Assessment B: Automated Detection

Run the bundled deterministic detector, which flags 25 specific patterns (AI slop tells + general design quality).

CLI scan:

npx impeccable --json [--fast] [target]
  • Pass HTML/JSX/TSX/Vue/Svelte files or directories as [target] (anything with markup). Do not pass CSS-only files.
  • For URLs, skip the CLI scan (it requires Puppeteer). Use browser visualization instead.
  • For large directories (200+ scannable files), use --fast (regex-only, skips jsdom)
  • For 500+ files, narrow scope or ask the user
  • Exit code 0 = clean, 2 = findings

Browser visualization (when browser automation tools are available AND the target is a viewable page):

The overlay is a visual aid for the user. It highlights issues directly in their browser. Do NOT scroll through the page to screenshot overlays. Instead, read the console output to get the results programmatically.

  1. Start the live detection server: ``bash npx impeccable live & ` Note the port printed to stdout (auto-assigned). Use --port=PORT` to fix it.
  2. Create a new tab and navigate to the page (use dev server URL for local files, or direct URL). Do not reuse existing tabs.
  3. Label the tab via javascript_tool so the user can distinguish it: ``javascript document.title = '[Human] ' + document.title; ``
  4. Scroll to top to ensure the page is scrolled to the very top before injection
  5. Inject via javascript_tool (replace PORT with the port from step 1): ``javascript const s = document.createElement('script'); s.src = 'http://localhost:PORT/detect.js'; document.head.appendChild(s); ``
  6. Wait 2-3 seconds for the detector to render overlays
  7. Read results from console using read_console_messages with pattern impeccable. The detector logs all findings with the [impeccable] prefix. Do NOT scroll through the page to take screenshots of the overlays.
  8. Cleanup: Stop the live server when done: ``bash npx impeccable live stop ``

For multi-view targets, inject on 3-5 representative pages. If injection fails, continue with CLI results only.

Return: CLI findings (JSON), browser console findings (if applicable), and any false positives noted.

Step 3: Generate Combined Critique Report

Synthesize both assessments into a single report. Do NOT simply concatenate. Weave the findings together, noting where the LLM review and detector agree, where the detector caught issues the LLM missed, and where detector findings are false positives.

Structure your feedback as a design director would:

Design Health Score
Consult [heuristics-scoring](reference/heuristics-scoring.md)

Present the Nielsen's 10 heuristics scores as a table:

#HeuristicScoreKey Issue
1Visibility of System Status?[specific finding or "n/a" if solid]
2Match System / Real World?
3User Control and Freedom?
4Consistency and Standards?
5Error Prevention?
6Recognition Rather Than Recall?
7Flexibility and Efficiency?
8Aesthetic and Minimalist Design?
9Error Recovery?
10Help and Documentation?
Total??/40[Rating band]

Be honest with scores. A 4 means genuinely excellent. Most real interfaces score 20-32.

Anti-Patterns Verdict

Start here. Does this look AI-generated?

LLM assessment: Your own evaluation of AI slop tells. Cover overall aesthetic feel, layout sameness, generic composition, missed opportunities for personality.

Deterministic scan: Summarize what the automated detector found, with counts and file locations. Note any additional issues the detector caught that you missed, and flag any false positives.

Visual overlays (if browser was used): Tell the user that overlays are now visible in the [Human] tab in their browser, highlighting the detected issues. Summarize what the console output reported.

Overall Impression

A brief gut reaction: what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.

What's Working

Highlight 2-3 things done well. Be specific about why they work.

Priority Issues

The 3-5 most impactful design problems, ordered by importance.

For each issue, tag with P0-P3 severity (consult heuristics-scoring for severity definitions):