mcpbeat

Frontend Design Review

microsoft/frontend-design-review

> Review and create distinctive, production-grade frontend interfaces with high design quality and design system compliance. UI code review, component reviews, responsive design checks, theme testing, and creating memorable UI. without UI, or non-frontend code.

3k tokens
context cost
the whole folder, loaded on every use
5
files
instructions only
0
copies elsewhere
how many repositories repackaged it
161 d ago
last touched
this folder, not the whole repository

Install

one command, takes just this skill from the repository
npx skills add https://github.com/microsoft/skills --skill frontend-design-review

What comes with it

6 749 bytes besides the instruction
references/pattern-examples.md
references/quick-checklist.md
references/review-output-format.md
references/review-type-modifiers.md

The instruction itself

19 sections, as written by the author

Frontend Design Review

Review UI implementations against design quality standards and your design system OR create distinctive, production-grade frontend interfaces from scratch.

Two Modes

Mode 1: Design Review

Evaluate existing UI for design system compliance, three quality pillars (Frictionless, Quality Craft, Trustworthy), accessibility, and code quality.

Mode 2: Creative Frontend Design

Create distinctive interfaces that avoid generic "AI slop" aesthetics, have clear conceptual direction, and execute with precision.


Creative Frontend Design

Before coding, commit to an aesthetic direction:

  • Purpose: What problem does this solve? Who uses it?
  • Tone: minimal, maximalist, retro-futuristic, organic, luxury, playful, editorial, brutalist, art deco, soft/pastel, industrial, etc.
  • Constraints: Framework, performance, accessibility requirements.
  • Differentiation: What makes this distinctive and context-appropriate?

Aesthetics Guidelines

  • Typography: Distinctive fonts that elevate aesthetics. Pair a display font with a refined body font. Avoid Inter, Roboto, Arial, Space Grotesk.
  • Color & Theme: Cohesive palette with CSS variables. Dominant colors + sharp accents > timid, evenly-distributed palettes.
  • Motion: CSS-only preferred. One well-orchestrated page load with staggered reveals > scattered micro-interactions.
  • Spatial Composition: Asymmetry, overlap, diagonal flow, grid-breaking elements, generous negative space OR controlled density.
  • Backgrounds: Gradient meshes, noise textures, geometric patterns, layered transparencies, dramatic shadows, grain overlays.

AVOID: Overused fonts, cliched color schemes, predictable layouts, cookie-cutter design without context-specific character.

Match implementation complexity to vision. Maximalist = elaborate code. Minimalist = restraint and precision.


Design Review

Design System Workflow

Before implementing:

  • Review component in your Storybook / component library for API and usage
  • Use Figma Dev Mode to get exact specs (spacing, tokens, properties)
  • Implement using design system components + design tokens

During review:

  • Compare implementation to Figma design
  • Verify design tokens are used (not hardcoded values)
  • Check all variants/states are implemented correctly
  • Flag deviations (needs design approval)

If component doesn't exist:

  • Check if existing component can be adapted
  • Reach out to design for new component creation
  • Document exception and rationale in code

Review Process

  • Identify user task
  • Check design system for matching patterns
  • Evaluate aesthetic direction
  • Identify scope (component, feature, or flow)
  • Evaluate each pillar
  • Score and prioritize issues (blocking/major/minor)
  • Provide recommendations with design system examples

Core Principles

  • Task completion: Minimum clicks. Every screen answers "What can I do?" and "What happens next?"
  • Action hierarchy: 1-2 primary actions per view. Progressive disclosure for secondary.
  • Onboarding: Explain features on introduction. Smart defaults over configuration.
  • Navigation: Clear entry/exit points. Back/cancel always available. Breadcrumbs for deep flows.

Quality Pillars

1. Frictionless Insight to Action

Evaluate: Task completable in ≤3 interactions? Primary action obvious and singular?

Red flags: Excessive clicks, multiple competing primary buttons, buried actions, dead ends.

2. Quality is Craft

Evaluate:

  • Design system compliance: matches Figma specs, uses design tokens
  • Aesthetic direction: distinctive typography, cohesive colors, intentional motion
  • Accessibility: Grade C minimum (WCAG 2.1 A), Grade B ideal (WCAG 2.1 AA)

Red flags: Generic AI aesthetics, hardcoded values, implementation doesn't match Figma, broken reflow, missing focus indicators.

3. Trustworthy Building

Evaluate:

  • AI transparency: disclaimer on AI-generated content
  • Error transparency: actionable error messages

Red flags: Missing AI disclaimers, opaque errors without guidance.


Review Output Format

See references/review-output-format.md for the full review template.

Review Type Modifiers

See references/review-type-modifiers.md for context-specific review focus areas (PR, Creative, Design, Accessibility).

Quick Checklist

See references/quick-checklist.md for the pre-approval checklist covering design system compliance, aesthetic quality, frictionless, quality craft, and trustworthy pillars.

Pattern Examples

See references/pattern-examples.md for good/bad examples of creative frontend and design system review work.


Acknowledgments

Creative frontend principles inspired by Anthropic's frontend-design skill. Design review principles and quality pillar framework created by @Quirinevwm for systematic UI evaluation.

How to use it

Copy the folder

Take microsoft/frontend-design-review from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.

Check the name does not clash

The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.