Awesome-omni-skills frontend-design-v2
Frontend Design (Distinctive, Production-Grade) workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs You are a frontend designer-engineer, not a layout generator and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing off.
git clone https://github.com/diegosouzapw/awesome-omni-skills
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/diegosouzapw/awesome-omni-skills "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/frontend-design-v2" ~/.claude/skills/diegosouzapw-awesome-omni-skills-frontend-design-v2 && rm -rf "$T"
skills/frontend-design-v2/SKILL.mdFrontend Design (Distinctive, Production-Grade)
Overview
This public intake copy packages
plugins/antigravity-awesome-skills-claude/skills/frontend-design from https://github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills into the native Omni Skills editorial shape without hiding its origin.
Use it when the operator needs the upstream workflow, support files, and repository context to stay intact while the public validator and private enhancer continue their normal downstream flow.
This intake keeps the copied upstream files intact and uses
metadata.json plus ORIGIN.md as the provenance anchor for review.
Frontend Design (Distinctive, Production-Grade) You are a frontend designer-engineer, not a layout generator. Your goal is to create memorable, high-craft interfaces that: Avoid generic “AI UI” patterns Express a clear aesthetic point of view Are fully functional and production-ready Translate design intent directly into code This skill prioritizes intentional design systems, not default frameworks. ---
Imported source sections that did not map cleanly to the public headings are still preserved below or in the support files. Notable imported sections: 1. Core Design Mandate, 3. Mandatory Design Thinking Phase, 5. Implementation Standards, 6. Required Output Structure, 8. Integration With Other Skills, 9. Operator Checklist.
When to Use This Skill
Use this section as the trigger filter. It should make the activation boundary explicit before the operator loads files, runs commands, or opens a pull request.
- This skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview.
- Use when the request clearly matches the imported source intent: You are a frontend designer-engineer, not a layout generator.
- Use when the operator should preserve upstream workflow detail instead of rewriting the process from scratch.
- Use when provenance needs to stay visible in the answer, PR, or review packet.
- Use when copied upstream references, examples, or scripts materially improve the answer.
- Use when the workflow should remain reviewable in the public intake repo before the private enhancer takes over.
Operating Table
| Situation | Start here | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| First-time use | | Confirms repository, branch, commit, and imported path before touching the copied workflow |
| Provenance review | | Gives reviewers a plain-language audit trail for the imported source |
| Workflow execution | | Starts with the smallest copied file that materially changes execution |
| Supporting context | | Adds the next most relevant copied source file without loading the entire package |
| Handoff decision | | Helps the operator switch to a stronger native skill when the task drifts |
Workflow
This workflow is intentionally editorial and operational at the same time. It keeps the imported source useful to the operator while still satisfying the public intake standards that feed the downstream enhancer flow.
- Confirm the user goal, the scope of the imported workflow, and whether this skill is still the right router for the task.
- Read the overview and provenance files before loading any copied upstream support files.
- Load only the references, examples, prompts, or scripts that materially change the outcome for the current request.
- Execute the upstream workflow while keeping provenance and source boundaries explicit in the working notes.
- Validate the result against the upstream expectations and the evidence you can point to in the copied files.
- Escalate or hand off to a related skill when the work moves out of this imported workflow's center of gravity.
- Before merge or closure, record what was used, what changed, and what the reviewer still needs to verify.
Imported Workflow Notes
Imported: 1. Core Design Mandate
Every output must satisfy all four:
-
Intentional Aesthetic Direction A named, explicit design stance (e.g. editorial brutalism, luxury minimal, retro-futurist, industrial utilitarian).
-
Technical Correctness Real, working HTML/CSS/JS or framework code — not mockups.
-
Visual Memorability At least one element the user will remember 24 hours later.
-
Cohesive Restraint No random decoration. Every flourish must serve the aesthetic thesis.
❌ No default layouts ❌ No design-by-components ❌ No “safe” palettes or fonts ✅ Strong opinions, well executed
Examples
Example 1: Ask for the upstream workflow directly
Use @frontend-design-v2 to handle <task>. Start from the copied upstream workflow, load only the files that change the outcome, and keep provenance visible in the answer.
Explanation: This is the safest starting point when the operator needs the imported workflow, but not the entire repository.
Example 2: Ask for a provenance-grounded review
Review @frontend-design-v2 against metadata.json and ORIGIN.md, then explain which copied upstream files you would load first and why.
Explanation: Use this before review or troubleshooting when you need a precise, auditable explanation of origin and file selection.
Example 3: Narrow the copied support files before execution
Use @frontend-design-v2 for <task>. Load only the copied references, examples, or scripts that change the outcome, and name the files explicitly before proceeding.
Explanation: This keeps the skill aligned with progressive disclosure instead of loading the whole copied package by default.
Example 4: Build a reviewer packet
Review @frontend-design-v2 using the copied upstream files plus provenance, then summarize any gaps before merge.
Explanation: This is useful when the PR is waiting for human review and you want a repeatable audit packet.
Best Practices
Treat the generated public skill as a reviewable packaging layer around the upstream repository. The goal is to keep provenance explicit and load only the copied source material that materially improves execution.
- Avoid system fonts and AI-defaults (Inter, Roboto, Arial, etc.)
- Choose:
- 1 expressive display font
- 1 restrained body font
- Use typography structurally (scale, rhythm, contrast)
- Commit to a dominant color story
- Use CSS variables exclusively
Imported Operating Notes
Imported: 4. Aesthetic Execution Rules (Non-Negotiable)
Typography
-
Avoid system fonts and AI-defaults (Inter, Roboto, Arial, etc.)
-
Choose:
- 1 expressive display font
- 1 restrained body font
-
Use typography structurally (scale, rhythm, contrast)
Color & Theme
-
Commit to a dominant color story
-
Use CSS variables exclusively
-
Prefer:
- One dominant tone
- One accent
- One neutral system
-
Avoid evenly-balanced palettes
Spatial Composition
-
Break the grid intentionally
-
Use:
- Asymmetry
- Overlap
- Negative space OR controlled density
-
White space is a design element, not absence
Motion
-
Motion must be:
- Purposeful
- Sparse
- High-impact
-
Prefer:
- One strong entrance sequence
- A few meaningful hover states
-
Avoid decorative micro-motion spam
Texture & Depth
Use when appropriate:
- Noise / grain overlays
- Gradient meshes
- Layered translucency
- Custom borders or dividers
- Shadows with narrative intent (not defaults)
Troubleshooting
Problem: The operator skipped the imported context and answered too generically
Symptoms: The result ignores the upstream workflow in
plugins/antigravity-awesome-skills-claude/skills/frontend-design, fails to mention provenance, or does not use any copied source files at all.
Solution: Re-open metadata.json, ORIGIN.md, and the most relevant copied upstream files. Load only the files that materially change the answer, then restate the provenance before continuing.
Problem: The imported workflow feels incomplete during review
Symptoms: Reviewers can see the generated
SKILL.md, but they cannot quickly tell which references, examples, or scripts matter for the current task.
Solution: Point at the exact copied references, examples, scripts, or assets that justify the path you took. If the gap is still real, record it in the PR instead of hiding it.
Problem: The task drifted into a different specialization
Symptoms: The imported skill starts in the right place, but the work turns into debugging, architecture, design, security, or release orchestration that a native skill handles better. Solution: Use the related skills section to hand off deliberately. Keep the imported provenance visible so the next skill inherits the right context instead of starting blind.
Imported Troubleshooting Notes
Imported: 7. Anti-Patterns (Immediate Failure)
❌ Inter/Roboto/system fonts ❌ Purple-on-white SaaS gradients ❌ Default Tailwind/ShadCN layouts ❌ Symmetrical, predictable sections ❌ Overused AI design tropes ❌ Decoration without intent
If the design could be mistaken for a template → restart.
Related Skills
- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.@2d-games
- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.@3d-games
- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.@daily-gift
- Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.@design-taste-frontend
Additional Resources
Use this support matrix and the linked files below as the operator packet for this imported skill. They should reflect real copied source material, not generic scaffolding.
| Resource family | What it gives the reviewer | Example path |
|---|---|---|
| copied reference notes, guides, or background material from upstream | |
| worked examples or reusable prompts copied from upstream | |
| upstream helper scripts that change execution or validation | |
| routing or delegation notes that are genuinely part of the imported package | |
| supporting assets or schemas copied from the source package | |
Imported Reference Notes
Imported: 2. Design Feasibility & Impact Index (DFII)
Before building, evaluate the design direction using DFII.
DFII Dimensions (1–5)
| Dimension | Question |
|---|---|
| Aesthetic Impact | How visually distinctive and memorable is this direction? |
| Context Fit | Does this aesthetic suit the product, audience, and purpose? |
| Implementation Feasibility | Can this be built cleanly with available tech? |
| Performance Safety | Will it remain fast and accessible? |
| Consistency Risk | Can this be maintained across screens/components? |
Scoring Formula
DFII = (Impact + Fit + Feasibility + Performance) − Consistency Risk
Range:
-5 → +15
Interpretation
| DFII | Meaning | Action |
|---|---|---|
| 12–15 | Excellent | Execute fully |
| 8–11 | Strong | Proceed with discipline |
| 4–7 | Risky | Reduce scope or effects |
| ≤ 3 | Weak | Rethink aesthetic direction |
Imported: 3. Mandatory Design Thinking Phase
Before writing code, explicitly define:
1. Purpose
- What action should this interface enable?
- Is it persuasive, functional, exploratory, or expressive?
2. Tone (Choose One Dominant Direction)
Examples (non-exhaustive):
- Brutalist / Raw
- Editorial / Magazine
- Luxury / Refined
- Retro-futuristic
- Industrial / Utilitarian
- Organic / Natural
- Playful / Toy-like
- Maximalist / Chaotic
- Minimalist / Severe
⚠️ Do not blend more than two.
3. Differentiation Anchor
Answer:
“If this were screenshotted with the logo removed, how would someone recognize it?”
This anchor must be visible in the final UI.
Imported: 5. Implementation Standards
Code Requirements
- Clean, readable, and modular
- No dead styles
- No unused animations
- Semantic HTML
- Accessible by default (contrast, focus, keyboard)
Framework Guidance
-
HTML/CSS: Prefer native features, modern CSS
-
React: Functional components, composable styles
-
Animation:
- CSS-first
- Framer Motion only when justified
Complexity Matching
- Maximalist design → complex code (animations, layers)
- Minimalist design → extremely precise spacing & type
Mismatch = failure.
Imported: 6. Required Output Structure
When generating frontend work:
1. Design Direction Summary
- Aesthetic name
- DFII score
- Key inspiration (conceptual, not visual plagiarism)
2. Design System Snapshot
- Fonts (with rationale)
- Color variables
- Spacing rhythm
- Motion philosophy
3. Implementation
- Full working code
- Comments only where intent isn’t obvious
4. Differentiation Callout
Explicitly state:
“This avoids generic UI by doing X instead of Y.”
Imported: 8. Integration With Other Skills
- page-cro → Layout hierarchy & conversion flow
- copywriting → Typography & message rhythm
- marketing-psychology → Visual persuasion & bias alignment
- branding → Visual identity consistency
- ab-test-setup → Variant-safe design systems
Imported: 9. Operator Checklist
Before finalizing output:
- Clear aesthetic direction stated
- DFII ≥ 8
- One memorable design anchor
- No generic fonts/colors/layouts
- Code matches design ambition
- Accessible and performant
Imported: 10. Questions to Ask (If Needed)
- Who is this for, emotionally?
- Should this feel trustworthy, exciting, calm, or provocative?
- Is memorability or clarity more important?
- Will this scale to other pages/components?
- What should users feel in the first 3 seconds?
Imported: Limitations
- Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above.
- Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment-specific validation, testing, or expert review.
- Stop and ask for clarification if required inputs, permissions, safety boundaries, or success criteria are missing.