/euxlab-design-review
writes two reports
Two parallel reviews, Standards and Evidence, side by side. Evidence walks every screen to its insight.
When you reach for it
An artifact is about to go to a stakeholder. Run both axes before it does. They answer different questions, and a combined score hides which one failed. With no design brief there is nothing to review against, so this stops and sends you back.
Input, output, writes
- Input
- The design (screens and a prototype),
docs/design-brief.md,research/insights/, and the engagement’s design system. - Output
- Two reports: Standards (heuristics, WCAG 2.1 AA, design system, enterprise smells) and Evidence (which insight does each screen serve, and where is that written), with a trace table per screen.
- Writes
- two reports
Completion criterion
Both reports delivered, one-line summary per axis, worst issue named within each axis, and no single winner across axes. The Evidence report has a trace row for every screen, and every Evidence finding names the insight ID, its file, and the requirement by its R number. Every Standards finding names the specific rule, ratio, or smell it violates. A finding with no rule and no insight behind it is an opinion and gets cut before the report ships.
Checkable, and demanding. A skill that cannot say whether it is finished is a prompt.
Anti-patterns
- Reranking both axes into one prioritised list.
- Shipping a finding that is a preference wearing a rule’s clothes.