Elgato_dark/Claude-Code-Game-Studios
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios synced 2026-04-21 21:37:19 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions
Claude-Code-Game-Studios/CCGS Skill Testing Framework/skills/authoring/ux-review.md
Donchitos a73ff759c9 Add v0.5.0: CCGS Skill Testing Framework, skill-improve, 4 new skills, director gate path fixes 
- Add CCGS Skill Testing Framework: self-contained QA layer with 72 skill specs,
  49 agent specs, catalog.yaml, quality-rubric.md, templates, README, CLAUDE.md
- Add /skill-improve: test-fix-retest loop covering static + category checks
- Add 4 missing skills: /art-bible, /asset-spec, /day-one-patch, /security-audit
- Add /skill-test category mode (Phase 2D) with quality rubric evaluation
- Extend /skill-test audit to cover agent specs alongside skill specs
- Update all skill-test and skill-improve path refs to CCGS Skill Testing Framework/
- Remove stale tests/skills/ directory (superseded by CCGS Skill Testing Framework)
- Add director gate intensity modes (full/lean/solo) to gate-check and related skills

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-06 17:42:32 +10:00

6.1 KiB
Raw Blame History

Skill Test Spec: /ux-review

Skill Summary

/ux-review validates an existing UX spec or HUD design document against accessibility and interaction standards. It checks for required sections (User Flows, Interaction States, Wireframe Description, Accessibility Notes), completeness of interaction state definitions (hover, focus, disabled, error), accessibility compliance (keyboard navigation, color contrast notes, screen reader considerations), and consistency with the art bible or design system if those documents exist.

The skill is read-only — it produces no file writes. Verdicts: APPROVED (all checks pass), NEEDS REVISION (fixable issues found), or MAJOR REVISION NEEDED (structural or accessibility failures). No director gates apply — /ux-review IS the review gate for UX specs.

Static Assertions (Structural)

Verified automatically by /skill-test static — no fixture needed.

  • Has required frontmatter fields: name, description, argument-hint, user-invocable, allowed-tools
  • Has ≥2 phase headings
  • Contains verdict keywords: APPROVED, NEEDS REVISION, MAJOR REVISION NEEDED
  • Does NOT contain "May I write" language (skill is read-only)
  • Has a next-step handoff (e.g., back to /ux-design for revision, or proceed to implementation)

Director Gate Checks

None. /ux-review is itself the review gate for UX specs. No additional director gates are invoked within this skill.

Test Cases

Case 1: Happy Path — Complete UX spec with all required sections, APPROVED

Fixture:

  • design/ux/hud.md exists with all required sections populated:
    • User Flows: complete player flow diagrams
    • Interaction States: normal, hover, focus, disabled, error all defined
    • Wireframe Description: layout described
    • Accessibility Notes: keyboard nav, contrast ratios, screen reader notes

Input: /ux-review hud

Expected behavior:

  1. Skill reads design/ux/hud.md
  2. Skill checks all 4 required sections — all present and non-empty
  3. Skill checks interaction states — all 5 states defined
  4. Skill checks accessibility notes — keyboard, contrast, and screen reader covered
  5. Skill outputs: checklist of all passed checks
  6. Verdict is APPROVED

Assertions:

  • All 4 required sections are checked
  • All 5 interaction states are verified present
  • Verdict is APPROVED
  • No files are written

Case 2: Missing Accessibility Section — NEEDS REVISION

Fixture:

  • design/ux/hud.md exists but the Accessibility Notes section is empty
  • All other sections are fully populated

Input: /ux-review hud

Expected behavior:

  1. Skill reads the file and checks all sections
  2. Accessibility Notes section is empty — check fails
  3. Skill outputs: "NEEDS REVISION — Accessibility Notes section is empty"
  4. Skill lists specific items to add: keyboard navigation, color contrast ratios, screen reader labels
  5. Verdict is NEEDS REVISION
  6. Handoff suggests returning to /ux-design hud to fill in the section

Assertions:

  • NEEDS REVISION verdict is returned (not APPROVED or MAJOR REVISION NEEDED)
  • Specific missing content items are listed
  • Handoff points back to /ux-design hud for revision
  • No files are written

Case 3: Interaction States Incomplete — NEEDS REVISION

Fixture:

  • design/ux/settings-menu.md exists
  • Interaction States section only defines: normal and hover
  • Missing: focus, disabled, error states

Input: /ux-review settings-menu

Expected behavior:

  1. Skill reads the file and checks interaction states
  2. Only 2 of 5 required states are defined
  3. Skill reports: "NEEDS REVISION — Interaction states incomplete: missing focus, disabled, error"
  4. Verdict is NEEDS REVISION with specific missing states named

Assertions:

  • NEEDS REVISION verdict returned
  • All 3 missing states are named explicitly in the output
  • Skill does not return MAJOR REVISION NEEDED for a fixable gap
  • Handoff suggests returning to /ux-design settings-menu

Case 4: File Not Found — Error with remediation

Fixture:

  • design/ux/inventory-screen.md does not exist

Input: /ux-review inventory-screen

Expected behavior:

  1. Skill attempts to read design/ux/inventory-screen.md — file not found
  2. Skill outputs: "UX spec not found: design/ux/inventory-screen.md"
  3. Skill suggests running /ux-design inventory-screen to create the spec first
  4. No review is performed; no verdict is issued

Assertions:

  • Error message names the missing file with full path
  • /ux-design inventory-screen is suggested as the remediation
  • No review checklist is produced
  • No verdict is issued (error state, not APPROVED/NEEDS REVISION)

Case 5: Director Gate Check — No gate; ux-review is itself the review

Fixture:

  • Valid UX spec file

Input: /ux-review hud

Expected behavior:

  1. Skill performs the review and issues a verdict
  2. No additional director agents are spawned
  3. No gate IDs appear in output

Assertions:

  • No director gate is invoked
  • No gate skip messages appear
  • Verdict is APPROVED, NEEDS REVISION, or MAJOR REVISION NEEDED — no gate verdict

Protocol Compliance

  • Checks all 4 required sections (User Flows, Interaction States, Wireframe, Accessibility Notes)
  • Checks all 5 interaction states (normal, hover, focus, disabled, error)
  • Checks accessibility coverage (keyboard nav, contrast, screen reader)
  • Does not write any files
  • Issues specific, actionable feedback when verdict is not APPROVED
  • Ends with next-step handoff to /ux-design for revision or implementation

Coverage Notes

  • MAJOR REVISION NEEDED is triggered when structural sections are entirely absent (not just empty) or when fundamental interaction flows are missing entirely; not tested with a separate fixture here.
  • Art bible / design system consistency check (color palette alignment) is mentioned as a capability but not separately fixture-tested.
  • The case where an existing spec was written for a now-renamed screen is not tested; the skill would review the file by path regardless of the name.