Product Design

mblode/agent-skills/skills/product-design

作者 mblodecef4cfa837ca无许可证144 个星标收录于 2026年10月8日更新于 2026年10月8日仓库今天更新

Specifies interaction choices, action scope, reversibility, recovery, and reachable states. Use when asked to "design the flow", "should delete be undoable", "choose the control", or "review this product decision".

AI 生成的概览

决定产品交互选择——控件、操作范围、可逆性、恢复与可达状态,并把构建与文案工作转交其他技能。

功能
充当界面行为的决策层:根据需求简报、规格、原型或现有界面,选择交互方式与控件,明确每个操作的对象、范围与后果,确定可逆性与相应保护措施,并枚举可达状态,包括错误、空态、离线与本地化情形。它以多种模式运行(shape、spec、review、action、harden),引用其参考文件中的规则编号,并按用户影响排序输出发现及最小可行修复。它明确停留在决策层面,把构建、样式、动效与最终文案转交相关技能。
适用场景
适用于被要求设计流程、选择控件、判断某操作是否应可撤销或需确认、评审流程背后的决策是否正确,或让流程在错误、权限、离线和破坏性路径下更稳健时。不适用于构建或美化界面、审查已渲染标记,或撰写最终文案。
运行要求
仅为指令,不含脚本。依赖其自带的参考文件(规则、产品判断、界面表面、命名与文案、界面质量),并在可用时参考项目指引(如 AGENTS.md)或设计系统。

Product Design

Decide what the interface should do, then route who builds and verifies it: pick the right interaction, make scope and consequence clear, cover reality beyond the happy path.

  • IS: the decision layer. From a brief, spec, mockup, intent, or existing UI: choose the interaction and control, name the object, scope, and consequence of each action, settle reversibility and the safeguard it implies, enumerate every reachable state, set resilience expectations, and require accessibility as task completion. It decides, then routes build, verification, and wording out.
  • IS NOT:
    • whether a feature deserves investment or fits the product: out of scope; state it as an open product question.
    • building or styling UI, visual direction, palettes, type: ui-design.
    • auditing the built result (rendered quality, a11y markup, keyboard, layout, performance, React or Next code-level UX with a ship verdict): ui-design Audit mode.
    • copy wording, persuasion, or AI-ism removal: ghostwriter.
    • motion, gesture physics, or deep typography: ui-animation, typography-audit.
    • whether an agentic feature earns trust: ax-audit.

Routing boundary

product-design owns action semantics, scope, reversibility, and contested state choices. ui-design builds and styles those states. ui-animation owns timing, gestures, and measured motion. A routine missing loading or error state stays with the UI build; a gesture replacing a control needs a product decision and an accessible alternative before its physics.

Request modes

Resolve one mode from the user's verb and artifact before acting, then load that mode's references. references/rules.md loads in every mode: every finding cites a rule ID from it, and you cannot conclude that no rule governs a decision without the registry in front of you.

ModeDispatch when the user asks forLoad (plus references/rules.md)
shape (default)"design the flow for", "what control here", "how should this work", "is this the right pattern", a brief with no settled UIreferences/product-judgment.md, references/surfaces.md
spec"spec the right interaction", "define the expected states", judgment applied before or during a buildreferences/product-judgment.md, references/surfaces.md, references/naming-and-copy.md; route the build to ui-design
review"review this flow for product correctness", "what's wrong with this UX decision", "is this the right interaction"references/interface-quality.md
action"what should this action affect", "should this be undoable", "do we need a confirm dialog", or reversibility is unsettledreferences/naming-and-copy.md; route final wording to ghostwriter
harden"make this resilient", "what breaks here", error, permission, offline, expiry, and destructive pathsreferences/surfaces.md, references/interface-quality.md, references/product-judgment.md

Review mode is about a flow, not an artifact. "Audit this component", "check my UI", and "design QA this page" point at built markup and belong to ui-design Audit mode. This skill's review asks whether the decisions behind a flow are right, and stops at decision altitude.

Modes chain: shape leads into spec; review leads into harden. When intent is ambiguous, use the narrowest mode the verb supports. A URL, screenshot, route, or component identifies scope; it does not authorize edits.

Whether a standard belongs in the consuming project's linter rather than in this skill is codebase-architecture's enforcement ladder. evals/evals.json never loads during a user task; it is the regression set for anyone changing this skill.

Workflow

text
Product design pass:- [ ] Step 1: Classify the request into one mode- [ ] Step 2: Locate authority (user constraints, project design system, AGENTS.md)- [ ] Step 3: Load rules.md plus that mode's reference files- [ ] Step 4: Write the internal brief (shape, spec, harden); stop and ask if job, outcome, or consequence is unfillable- [ ] Step 5: Name object, scope, consequence, and reversibility for each action in scope (spec, action, review)- [ ] Step 6: Enumerate reachable states and check coverage (shape, spec, harden)- [ ] Step 7: Emit output with a rule ID or labeled coverage gap per finding or decision; route follow-on work to siblings- [ ] Step 8: List unresolved product decisions

Steps 5 and 6 are mode-scoped because their references are: a pure action pass has no state matrix to enumerate, and a shape pass has no built actions to name yet.

Output length follows the work, not the template. A single settled decision is a short answer; drop the sections a pass did not need rather than filling them.

Decision authority

Conflict order, highest first:

  1. The user's explicit goal and constraints.
  2. Verified user and product evidence, and what the system actually does.
  3. Project-canonical guidance: AGENTS.md or CLAUDE.md, the project's design system, routed sibling skills.
  4. Sibling-skill ownership: route, do not duplicate.
  5. This skill's standards (below).
  6. General interface and platform conventions (WCAG 2.2, NN/g, Apple HIG, Material, GOV.UK), which references/rules.md cites per rule.

When a request spans authorities, name the owning skill and hand off.

Product design standards

Five pillars, each naming its rule IDs in references/rules.md and the reference that details it.

  • Right interaction. Pick the control from the choice's shape; keep options visible and reversible; prefer inline disclosure over a modal; every gesture has a control alternative; choose the smallest coherent intervention. rule/control-matches-cardinality, rule/navigation-vs-action, rule/inline-before-modal, rule/no-nested-modals, rule/gesture-has-control-alternative, rule/smallest-intervention. Detail: references/product-judgment.md.
  • Action naming and consequence. Name the object, scope, and consequence; settle reversibility first, then the pattern; an irreversible action gets review, check, or named confirmation; undo appears only when honest. rule/name-object-scope-consequence, rule/destructive-names-action, rule/destructive-proportional, rule/irreversible-action-safeguard, rule/undo-only-when-honest, rule/preserve-user-input. Detail: references/naming-and-copy.md.
  • State coverage. Design every reachable state, not just the populated one: empty states name the object and a first action; errors explain and offer recovery; timers warn before they discard. rule/cover-reachable-states, rule/empty-state-action, rule/error-states-recovery, rule/loading-stable-labels, rule/time-limit-adjustable. Detail: references/surfaces.md.
  • Resilience. Overflow, extreme data, localization and RTL, offline, and network failure are designed states; every fetch lands in one. Shares rule/cover-reachable-states: it is the same requirement pointed at adverse inputs. Detail: references/surfaces.md > Resilience. Whether the built UI renders them is ui-design Audit mode's check.
  • Accessibility as task completion. Every control has a name; the primary flow completes by keyboard with visible focus; nothing already entered is retyped; authentication allows assistance; state and consequence are understandable, not just labeled. rule/accessible-name-required, rule/keyboard-complete-flow, rule/no-custom-focus-bypass, rule/no-redundant-entry, rule/auth-allows-assistance. Detail: references/interface-quality.md. Markup and target-size checks route to ui-design Audit mode.

Review output

In review and harden modes, lead with findings ordered by user impact (P0 to P3), each with location, verification status, rule ID, user consequence, and the smallest concrete fix with the skill that owns it. Keep findings at decision altitude; a line-level code or framework fix is ui-design Audit mode's output. Rubric and finding format: references/interface-quality.md > Severity rubric.

Gotchas

  • A confirmation dialog on a reversible action (archive, remove from list, unsubscribe) trains users to click through, so the one confirmation that matters, permanent delete, gets the same reflexive click. NN/g's "cry wolf" finding. Act and offer undo instead (rule/destructive-proportional).
  • An undo toast as the only recovery path: it vanishes in about five seconds, and the object is gone. Either the object stays recoverable (Trash, Archive) or the action is irreversible and needs a safeguard. Do not call it undo otherwise (rule/undo-only-when-honest, WCAG 2.2.1).
  • Swipe-to-delete or drag-to-reorder with no button or menu equivalent fails WCAG 2.5.1 and 2.5.7 outright and is undiscoverable to everyone else. Spec the alternative before routing the physics to ui-animation (rule/gesture-has-control-alternative).
  • A segmented control with three fixed-width English labels: strings under 10 characters grow 200 to 300% in translation (W3C), so "Day / Week / Month" becomes a wrapped or clipped mess in German. Decide the wrap or stack behavior in the spec.
  • Reusing the "No projects yet, Create project" empty state for a filtered-to-zero list. The user creates a duplicate because the item they searched for exists behind the filter. Three empties, three designs (references/surfaces.md).
  • A checkout or sign-up that asks again for something entered two steps earlier (billing address after shipping, email after account) fails WCAG 3.3.7 and is the step where mobile users leave (rule/no-redundant-entry).
  • Emitting a line-level fix (a prop, a hook, a className) instead of the decision. It arrives without the rendered check that would validate it, and the product decision it was supposed to carry goes unstated. Route it to ui-design Audit mode.
  • Citing a plausible-sounding rule ID that does not exist (rule/clear-labels). The citation resolves to nothing, so the finding cannot be deduped against a ui-design audit or traced to a rule. Record a coverage gap instead.

Related skills

  • ui-design: visual direction and building the decided interaction in code; its Audit mode covers the built result, rendered quality and accessibility markup, with a ship verdict.
  • ghostwriter: exact wording for names, errors, and empty and loading copy, written against the copy rule IDs this skill owns in references/rules.md.
  • ui-animation: the passage between two states (timing, easing, springs, gesture physics). This skill settles whether a gesture replaces a control and what its alternative is; that skill builds the motion.
  • ax-audit: whether a built agentic feature earns trust; this skill decides what it should do first.
  • typography-audit: deep type.

来源与署名

来源:mblode/agent-skills位于skills/product-design提交cef4cfa

许可证: 无许可证

内容归原作者所有。SourceWeft 从公开仓库中收录这些内容。

举报或申请下架