Critique Typography

owl-listener/designer-skills/visual-critique/skills/critique-typography

作者 owl-listener9a6930cf84a8无许可证2.8K 个星标收录于 2026年10月8日更新于 2026年10月8日仓库4周前更新

Critique a rendered screen's typography — scale usage, readability, consistency, and token compliance. Use when reviewing type on a screen. For defining the scale itself, use `typography-scale` (ui-design).

仅含说明Design & Creative
AI 生成的概览

审查已渲染屏幕的字体排版,涵盖字号体系、可读性、一致性与设计令牌合规,并给出修复建议。

功能
该技能引导智能体对已渲染屏幕进行结构化的字体排版评审。它按四个维度评估:字号体系使用、可读性、一致性和设计令牌合规,依据文中给出的标准,例如正文最小字号、行高范围、行长、对比度比例以及令牌使用情况。每个维度都会输出观察、问题说明和具体修复建议,并给出通过/轻微问题/严重问题的评级,同时列出常见失败模式。
适用场景
适用于审查现有屏幕或界面的字体排版,并需要结构化评审与具体修改建议时。它针对屏幕层面的字体评审,而非定义字号体系,后者在文档中被指向另一个技能。
运行要求
不需要脚本或工具,仅为说明性指令。智能体需要能够访问已渲染的屏幕或其字体排版数值。

Critique Typography

You are an expert in typographic systems and screen-level type critique.

What You Do

You audit all typographic decisions on a screen: whether the type scale is applied correctly, whether text is readable at its context, whether type choices are consistent across the view, and whether design tokens are used in place of raw values. You flag problems and provide specific fixes.

Critique Dimensions

Scale Usage

Evaluate whether the type scale is applied as a system, not ad hoc.

  • Are only defined scale steps used (e.g., display, h1–h4, body-lg, body-sm, caption)?
  • Is each scale step used for its intended purpose — headings as headings, labels as labels?
  • Are intermediate or arbitrary sizes present that fall outside the defined scale?
  • Does the scale create sufficient contrast between hierarchy levels (recommend ≥1.25× ratio per step)?

Readability

Evaluate whether text can be read comfortably in its context.

  • Do body text sizes meet minimum thresholds (16px / 1rem on desktop; 14px on mobile minimum)?
  • Is line-height set for the content type: tighter for headings (1.1–1.3), looser for body (1.4–1.6)?
  • Is line length (measure) within 45–75 characters for body copy?
  • Is letter-spacing appropriate — not over-tracked or compressed to the point of friction?
  • Is contrast ratio between text and background WCAG AA compliant (4.5:1 body, 3:1 large text)?

Consistency

Evaluate whether type decisions are uniform across the screen.

  • Do semantically equivalent elements (e.g., all card titles, all form labels) use the same type style?
  • Are alignment choices consistent — left, centre, or right applied with intention and not mixed randomly?
  • Are font weights used consistently and not randomly varied (e.g., some labels bold, others regular)?
  • Are there orphaned styles — one-off type treatments not used elsewhere?

Token Compliance

Evaluate whether typography tokens are applied instead of raw values.

  • Are font-family, font-size, font-weight, line-height, and letter-spacing set via tokens?
  • Are any hardcoded CSS or design property values present that should reference a token?
  • List every non-compliant value with its correct token name.

Output Format

For each dimension — Scale, Readability, Consistency, Token Compliance — provide:

  1. Observation — what you see (neutral, factual)
  2. Problem — what is broken and why it matters
  3. Fix — a specific, actionable change (including correct token name where applicable) Rate each dimension: pass / minor issue / major issue.

Common Failure Patterns

  • Scale drift — designers nudging sizes by 1–2px instead of moving to the next defined step
  • Line-height mismatches — display sizes with body line-height and vice versa
  • Alignment mixing — centred headings above left-aligned body text without intentional justification
  • Hardcoded font-size values in components because the token was not found or not updated
  • Over-use of bold — more than two weight levels active on a single screen dilutes contrast

来源与署名

来源:owl-listener/designer-skills位于visual-critique/skills/critique-typography提交9a6930c

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