/euxlab-design-review
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.