# Design Critique Report

Scores an HTML design on five dimensions and lists what to keep, fix and quick-win.

- Repository: https://github.com/nexu-io/open-design (105332 stars)
- Category: Design
- License: Apache-2.0
- Last updated: 2026-11-01
- Runs scripts: no, instructions only

## Install

Claude Code: `npx skills add nexu-io/open-design --skill critique -g -a claude-code -y`
Codex: `npx skills add nexu-io/open-design --skill critique -g -a codex -y`
Cursor: `npx skills add nexu-io/open-design --skill critique -g -a cursor -y`
Gemini CLI: `npx skills add nexu-io/open-design --skill critique -g -a gemini-cli -y`
Claude Code plugin marketplace: `/plugin marketplace add nexu-io/open-design`

## Description

Run a 5-dimension expert design review on any HTML artifact in the project, Philosophy / Visual hierarchy / Detail / Functionality / Innovation, each scored 0, 10. Outputs a single self-contained HTML report with a radar chart, evidence-backed scores, and three lists: Keep / Fix / Quick-wins. Use when the brief asks for a "design review", "design critique", "5 维度评审", "design audit", or "what's wrong with my design".

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

# Critique Skill · 5 维度专家评审

Produce a single-file HTML "design review report" that scores any
artifact across 5 dimensions and proposes actionable fixes. Inspired by
the *huashu-design* expert-critique flow.

## When to use

- After the agent (or user) generates an artifact (deck / prototype /
  landing page) and the user asks "what's wrong with this?" or
  "review this"
- As a self-check loop the agent can run on its own output **before**
  emitting it
- For comparing two variants of the same design

## What you produce

A single self-contained `<artifact type="text/html">` review report
including:

1. **Header**, what artifact was reviewed, date, reviewer ("OD ·
   Critique skill"), 1-line verdict
2. **Radar chart** (inline SVG, no library) showing the 5 scores
3. **Five dimension cards**, each with:
   - Score 0, 10 (with band: 0, 4 *Broken* · 5, 6 *Functional* · 7, 8 *Strong*
     · 9, 10 *Exceptional*)
   - 1-paragraph evidence (cite specific elements / files / lines)
   - One Keep / Fix / Quick-win bullet
4. **Combined action lists** at the bottom:
   - **Keep**, what's working, don't touch
   - **Fix**, P0 / P1 issues that are visually expensive
   - **Quick wins**, 5, 15 minute tweaks with disproportionate impact

## The 5 dimensions

> Each dimension is independent, a deck can be 9/10 on Innovation but
> 4/10 on Hierarchy and the report should say so plainly. Don't average
> away interesting failures.

### 1. Philosophy consistency · 哲学一致性

> Does the artifact pick a clear *direction* and stick to it through
> every micro-decision (chrome / kicker / spacing / accent)?

**Evidence to look for:**
- Is there one declared design direction (e.g. Monocle / WIRED /
  Kinfolk) or is it three styles in a trench coat?
- Does the chrome / kicker vocabulary stay in one register, or does
  page 3 say "Vol.04 · Spring" and page 7 say "BUT WAIT 🔥"?
- Are accent / serif / mono used by the same rule throughout?

The rest: https://github.com/nexu-io/open-design/blob/HEAD/design-templates/critique/SKILL.md