UI Review

Overview

This public intake copy packages

plugins/antigravity-awesome-skills-claude/skills/ui-review

https://github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills

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

ORIGIN.md

UI Review

Imported source sections that did not map cleanly to the public headings are still preserved below or in the support files. Notable imported sections: Review Checklist, Output Format, Limitations.

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.

• Use when a component or page should follow the StyleSeed Toss design language
• Use when reviewing a UI-heavy PR for consistency and design-system violations
• Use when the output looks "mostly fine" but feels off in subtle ways
• Use when you need a structured review with concrete fixes
• Use when the request clearly matches the imported source intent: Review UI code for StyleSeed design-system compliance, accessibility, mobile ergonomics, spacing discipline, and implementation quality.
• Use when the operator should preserve upstream workflow detail instead of rewriting the process from scratch.

Operating Table

metadata.json

ORIGIN.md

SKILL.md

SKILL.md

## Related Skills

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.

1. Confirm the user goal, the scope of the imported workflow, and whether this skill is still the right router for the task.
2. Read the overview and provenance files before loading any copied upstream support files.
3. Load only the references, examples, prompts, or scripts that materially change the outcome for the current request.
4. Execute the upstream workflow while keeping provenance and source boundaries explicit in the working notes.
5. Validate the result against the upstream expectations and the evidence you can point to in the copied files.
6. Escalate or hand off to a related skill when the work moves out of this imported workflow's center of gravity.
7. Before merge or closure, record what was used, what changed, and what the reviewer still needs to verify.

Imported Workflow Notes

Imported: Overview

Part of StyleSeed, this skill audits UI code against the Toss seed's conventions instead of reviewing it as generic frontend work. It focuses on design-token discipline, component ergonomics, accessibility, mobile readiness, typography, and spacing consistency.

Imported: Review Checklist

Design Tokens

• no hardcoded hex colors when semantic tokens exist
• no improvised shadow values when tokenized shadows exist
• no arbitrary radius choices outside the system scale
• no random spacing values that break the seed rhythm

Component Conventions

• uses the project's class merge helper
• supports

  className

  extension when appropriate
• uses the agreed typing pattern
• avoids wrapper components that only forward one class string
• reuses existing primitives before inventing new ones

Accessibility

• touch targets large enough for mobile
• visible keyboard focus states
• labels and

  aria-*

  attributes where needed
• adequate color contrast
• reduced-motion respect for animation

Mobile UX

• no horizontal overflow
• safe-area handling where relevant
• readable text sizes
• thumb-friendly interaction spacing
• bottom nav or sticky actions do not obscure content

Typography and Spacing

• uses the system type hierarchy
• display and headings are not overly loose
• body text remains readable
• spacing follows the seed grid instead of arbitrary values

Examples

Example 1: Ask for the upstream workflow directly

Use @ui-review 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 @ui-review 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 @ui-review 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 @ui-review 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.

• Review against the seed, not against personal taste
• Separate stylistic drift from real usability or accessibility bugs
• Prefer actionable diffs over abstract criticism
• Call out duplication when an existing component already solves the problem
• Keep the imported skill grounded in the upstream repository; do not invent steps that the source material cannot support.
• Prefer the smallest useful set of support files so the workflow stays auditable and fast to review.
• Keep provenance, source commit, and imported file paths visible in notes and PR descriptions.

Imported Operating Notes

Imported: Best Practices

• Review against the seed, not against personal taste
• Separate stylistic drift from real usability or accessibility bugs
• Prefer actionable diffs over abstract criticism
• Call out duplication when an existing component already solves the problem

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/ui-review

metadata.json

ORIGIN.md

Problem: The imported workflow feels incomplete during review

Symptoms: Reviewers can see the generated

SKILL.md

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.

Related Skills

• @trpc-fullstack

  - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.

• @trust-calibrator

  - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.

• @turborepo-caching

  - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.

• @tutorial-engineer

  - Use when the work is better handled by that native specialization after this imported skill establishes context.

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.

references

references/n/a

examples

examples/n/a

scripts

scripts/n/a

agents

agents/n/a

assets

assets/n/a

Imported Reference Notes

Imported: Additional Resources

• StyleSeed repository
• Source skill

Imported: Output Format

Return:

1. A verdict: Pass, Needs Improvement, or Fail
2. A prioritized list of issues with file and line references when available
3. Concrete fixes for each issue
4. Any open questions where the design intent is ambiguous

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.