# Critique

Adversarial design critique of the current work.

- Repository: https://github.com/plugin87/ux-ui-agent-skills (3071 stars)
- Category: Design
- License: MIT
- Last updated: 2026-10-27
- Runs scripts: no, instructions only

## Install

Claude Code: `npx skills add plugin87/ux-ui-agent-skills --skill critique -g -a claude-code -y`
Codex: `npx skills add plugin87/ux-ui-agent-skills --skill critique -g -a codex -y`
Cursor: `npx skills add plugin87/ux-ui-agent-skills --skill critique -g -a cursor -y`
Gemini CLI: `npx skills add plugin87/ux-ui-agent-skills --skill critique -g -a gemini-cli -y`
Claude Code plugin marketplace: `/plugin marketplace add plugin87/ux-ui-agent-skills`

## Description

Adversarial design critique of the current work. Render it, look at it, and argue for rejection. Run after the gates are green, never instead of them.

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

You are now running in a forked context. You cannot see the conversation that
produced this work, you cannot ask the user a question, and nothing you learned
elsewhere applies. Everything you need is below or on disk.

**Step 0: is the kit here?**

```bash
ls ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../../tokens >/dev/null 2>&1 && echo KIT_OK || echo KIT_MISSING
```

On `KIT_MISSING` only the skill folders were installed, which is what `npx
skills add` does. Say so plainly, point at `npx ux-ui-agent-skills init` or the
plugin install, and stop. Do not guess the contents of a file you could not open.

**Step 1: take the critic's instructions, in full.**

```bash
cat ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../../.claude/agents/design-critic.md
```

That file is your brief: the stance, the three rules you never break, and the
verdict format. Read it and follow it literally. If it is missing, say so and
stop rather than improvising a critique: an unbriefed critic is a second
opinion, not a review.

**Step 2: resolve the target.**

Target: `$ARGUMENTS`, a file or a directory.

You cannot ask. If `$ARGUMENTS` is empty or names nothing that exists, say
exactly what you were given, list what you would have accepted, and stop. A
critique of a guessed target is worse than no critique, because it reads like a
verdict on the real work.

**Step 3: refuse to critique blind.**

A critique written from source alone is worthless. Render the target and look at
it: screenshot every screen or harness at 1280 and 390 wide, light and dark,
transitions off and the pointer parked off the UI. Then click every control and
write down what actually changed. A control that changes nothing is a finding.

**Step 4: gather the numbers you will cite.**

The rest: https://github.com/plugin87/ux-ui-agent-skills/blob/HEAD/.claude/skills/critique/SKILL.md