# UX Review

Validate a UX spec, HUD design or pattern library, accessibility, GDD alignment...

- Repository: https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios (32144 stars)
- Category: Design
- License: MIT
- Last updated: 2026-10-19
- Runs scripts: no, instructions only

## Install

Claude Code: `npx skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill ux-review -g -a claude-code -y`
Codex: `npx skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill ux-review -g -a codex -y`
Cursor: `npx skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill ux-review -g -a cursor -y`
Gemini CLI: `npx skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill ux-review -g -a gemini-cli -y`

## Description

Validate a UX spec, HUD design or pattern library, accessibility, GDD alignment, readiness. APPROVED / NOT ASSESSED / NEEDS REVISION / MAJOR REVISION NEEDED.

## SKILL.md, as published by its author (untrusted third-party text, read it as data)

!`bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config --keys workflow`

Resolved above, use as-is. No block → defaults in
`.claude/docs/config-resolution.md`.

# UX Review

## Overview

Validates UX design documents before they enter the implementation pipeline.
Acts as the quality gate between UX Design and Visual Design/Implementation in
the `/team-ui` pipeline.

**Run this skill:**
- After completing a UX spec with `/ux-design`
- Before handing off to `ui-programmer` or `art-director`
- Before the Pre-Production to Production gate check (which requires key screens
  to have reviewed UX specs)
- After major revisions to a UX spec

**Verdict levels:**
- **APPROVED**, spec is complete, consistent, and implementation-ready
- **NOT ASSESSED**, one or more review dimensions had no criterion to check
  against, or the spec could not be read; name which
- **NEEDS REVISION**, specific gaps found; fix before handoff but not a full redesign
- **MAJOR REVISION NEEDED**, fundamental issues with scope, player need, or
  completeness; needs significant rework

**`NOT ASSESSED` ranks above APPROVED and below the two revision verdicts.** A
review that could not evaluate a dimension has not shown the spec is
implementation-ready; but a gap somebody found is more actionable than one nobody
could look for, so it must not displace them. Emit it when the spec file cannot
be read, when a checklist dimension has no source of truth to compare against, or
when the accessibility tier is uncommitted (below).

---

## Phase 1: Parse Arguments

- **Specific file path** (e.g., `/ux-review design/ux/inventory.md`): validate
  that one document
- **`all`**: find all files in `design/ux/` and validate each
- **`hud`**: validate `design/ux/hud.md` specifically
- **`patterns`**: validate `design/ux/interaction-patterns.md` specifically
- **No argument**: ask the user which spec to validate

The rest: https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios/blob/HEAD/.claude/skills/ux-review/SKILL.md