From scope-check
Evaluates product UI/UX design using Benji Taylor's principles: progressive disclosure, fluidity, simplicity/delight, craft, trust/clarity, accessibility. For critiques, audits, mockups.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/scope-check:benji-taylor-design-evalThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Structured design critique based on the principles Benji Taylor has articulated and demonstrated
Structured design critique based on the principles Benji Taylor has articulated and demonstrated through his work on the Family self-custody wallet, Base (Coinbase L2), and X. Surfaces real tensions in a design and where it resolves or fails them -- not a scorecard with arbitrary numbers.
When NOT to use:
| Dimension | Core Question |
|---|---|
| Progressive Disclosure | Does complexity appear only when needed? |
| Fluidity | Does motion communicate state changes? |
| Simplicity/Fluidity/Delight | Are all three present, not just one? |
| Craft | Are edge cases designed with equal care? |
| Trust Through Clarity | Are high-stakes actions unambiguous? |
| Accessibility Without Depth | Can novices and experts coexist? |
The principle: Fundamentals at your fingertips. Everything else appears as it becomes relevant. Never dump all features at once.
What to look for:
Failure modes:
The principle: Motion is not decoration. It is a channel for communicating state changes, transitions, and the weight of an action.
What to look for:
Failure modes:
Each pillar resolves a specific failure mode, and all three must be present:
| Pillar | Resolves | Test question |
|---|---|---|
| Simplicity | Cognitive overload | Can a first-time user orient themselves in under 10 seconds? |
| Fluidity | Experience fragmentation | Does the product feel like one continuous thing or a set of screens? |
| Delight | Emotional disengagement | Is there at least one moment where the product surprises the user pleasantly? |
What to look for:
The principle: Polish is not a finishing coat. It is a deliberate choice to slow down and do fewer things better, treated as a strategic differentiator rather than a luxury.
What to look for:
Failure modes:
The principle: When an action is irreversible, consequential, or involves real-world assets (money, data, identity), the interface must make the stakes unambiguous -- before, during, and after.
This is Taylor's most hard-won principle from crypto product design. It generalises to any interaction where the user might regret an action.
What to look for:
Failure modes:
The principle: Making a product approachable for newcomers must not strip power from experienced users. The tension is resolved through layering, not simplification.
What to look for:
Failure modes:
Structure your evaluation as follows:
Context: [One sentence on what the product is and who it is for]
For each of the six dimensions, write:
End with:
Strongest dimension: [which one and why] Most critical gap: [which one and why -- this is where design investment would have highest leverage] Overall character: [one paragraph on the product's design identity -- what kind of designer built this, what values are implicit in the choices]
Input the evaluator needs (ask for what is missing):
If screenshots are not provided: Evaluate based on the product description and any publicly available information. Be explicit about what is inferred vs. observed.
npx claudepluginhub dvdarkin/claude-skills --plugin scope-checkScores designs against Dieter Rams' ten principles and hands off a /make-plan prompt for new, refine, or redesign outcomes.
Provides structured design critique using UX frameworks (Jobs-to-be-Done, Gestalt, Nielsen heuristics). Useful for reviewing UIs, wireframes, Figma files, or user flows with prioritized actionable feedback.
Provides structured critique of design work against briefs, plans, principles, personas, and taste profiles, covering intent, accessibility, consistency, user impact, and craft quality. Use after design tasks or before handoff.