JoaoMonteiro100
UserA collection of 7 UX & product-design skills for Claude
Categories
Indexed Skills (7)
accessibility-review
Audits a digital product against recognized accessibility standards — WCAG (the W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines) and IBM's accessibility requirements — and produces a prioritized findings report mapping each issue to the specific success criterion it fails, with severity and a concrete fix. Use this whenever the user wants an accessibility review, a11y audit, WCAG check, Section 508 / EN 301 549 conformance pass, or wants to know whether a screen, component, flow, PDF, or document is accessible; wants to fix contrast, keyboard, screen-reader, focus, alt-text, form-label, or ARIA problems; or asks which WCAG criterion something violates. Reach for it even when "accessibility" isn't named — any request to make a UI usable for people with disabilities, or to meet a legal accessibility requirement, qualifies.
competitive-analysis
Produces a structured competitive analysis of a product or company — mapping the competitive landscape, comparing features and positioning, analyzing rivals through the jobs customers are trying to get done, and landing on a clear "where we win / where we're exposed" conclusion with recommendations. Use this whenever the user wants a competitive analysis, competitor teardown, market/ landscape scan, feature comparison, positioning map, or SWOT of competitors; is preparing a strategy, pitch, roadmap, or launch and needs to understand rivals; or asks how their product stacks up against specific competitors. Push for a decision-focused analysis grounded in evidence, not a neutral feature table that leads nowhere.
design-fundamentals
A working reference for visual and graphic design fundamentals — typography, color, layout and grids, visual hierarchy, spacing, and the perception principles behind them. Consult this whenever making or critiquing visual design decisions: choosing or pairing typefaces, setting type for readability, building a color palette, laying out a page/screen/slide/poster, establishing hierarchy, fixing a cluttered or unbalanced composition, or explaining *why* a design does or doesn't work. Use it when the user asks for design feedback, wants their layout/typography/color improved, or is designing any visual artifact and wants it to look considered rather than accidental. Reach for this even when "design fundamentals" isn't named — any real visual-design choice benefits from it.
heuristic-evaluation
Runs an expert usability inspection (heuristic evaluation) of a digital product — reviewing screens, flows, or a whole interface against established usability principles, logging issues with a consistent severity rating, and producing a prioritized findings report with recommendations. Use this whenever the user wants to audit, review, critique, or evaluate the usability of an interface without recruiting users; wants a "heuristic evaluation", "UX audit", "usability review", "expert review", or "cognitive walkthrough"; wants to find usability problems in a design, prototype, or live product themselves; or asks which usability principles a screen violates. This is expert-based inspection with NO participants — if the user instead wants to test with real users, that is moderated usability testing, a different method.
inclusive-design
Reviews products, forms, and copy through an inclusive, equitable lens — surfacing who a design excludes and how to widen it — and rewrites language to be more inclusive ("copy that cares"). Use whenever the user wants a design or any writing made more inclusive, equitable, or welcoming; is designing names/identity/gender/pronoun fields or sign-up forms; worries about excluding, misrepresenting, or outing users; or wants copy reviewed for gendered, racialized, ableist, or otherwise non-inclusive language. Reach for it on identity, representation, and inclusive-language questions even when "inclusive design" isn't named. It reasons from patterns (catching "congressman" from the same rule as "fireman") and works in ANY language, not just English. NOT for disability/assistive-tech accessibility (screen readers, keyboard, contrast, WCAG) — that's the accessibility-review skill. Context-aware, centered on user safety, not blanket word-banning.
persona-builder
Creates clear, evidence-based UX personas that represent the key user segments of a product, and a discussion guide for developing them from research. Use this whenever the user wants to create, write, structure, or improve personas, user profiles, or audience segments; needs a template or format for personas; wants to turn user research or interviews into personas; or asks who their users are and how to represent them for a design/product team. Also use to critique existing personas or convert demographic profiles into task- and goal-focused ones. Steer users away from inventing personas from thin air — push toward grounding them in real evidence.
ux-usability-study
Plans and produces the complete set of materials for a moderated usability test — research questions and success metrics, a recruiting screener, a consent form, a facilitator script with think-aloud protocol, realistic task scenarios, a note-taking and issue-tracking structure, and a findings report. Use this whenever the user wants to run, plan, prepare, or moderate usability testing, user testing, or a usability study; wants to recruit or screen test participants; needs a test script, tasks, or scenarios; needs to take structured notes during sessions; or wants to synthesize observations from real user/participant sessions into prioritized findings (that synthesis belongs here, not to heuristic evaluation). Trigger even when the user only describes the situation ("we're about to watch five people use our checkout flow") without naming "usability testing" explicitly.
Bio shown is the top-scored skill's repo description as a fallback — real GitHub bios land in a future update.