Notre avis
Cette compétence fournit un cadre structuré pour évaluer la qualité d'une présentation web avant sa mise en production, combinant une checklist de validation et une critique multidimensionnelle.
Points forts
- Grille d'évaluation explicite avec niveaux de priorité (P0, P1, P2) pour éviter les décisions vagues.
- Critique sur cinq dimensions (adéquation, hiérarchie, exécution, spécificité, retenue) pour une évaluation équilibrée.
- Audit anti-‘slop’ pour détecter les artefacts génériques ou excessifs produits par l'IA.
- Verdict clair (PASS, REVISION_NEEDED, BLOCKED) avec chemin de retour recommandé.
Limites
- Ne remplace pas les tests fonctionnels ou de performance.
- Nécessite une bonne compréhension des documents de référence pour être efficace.
- Peut être perçu comme rigide si les critères ne sont pas adaptés au contexte.
Utilisez cette compétence lorsqu'une présentation ou page web est présentée comme finalisée et nécessite une validation rigoureuse avant approbation.
Ne l'utilisez pas pour des pages en cours de développement ou pour des évaluations purement esthétiques sans besoin de décision de validation.
Analyse de sécurité
SûrThe skill is purely instructional, describing a review process for presentations. It contains no executable commands, no exfiltration, and no destructive actions. It references only internal reference files, posing no security risk.
Aucun point d'attention détecté
Exemples
I have a redesigned home page for our SaaS product. Run the full presentation critique on it using the checklist and five-dimension rubric. The target is the latest Figma mockup, version 2.1. Provide a verdict and blocking findings.This landing page uses heavy animations and parallax. Apply the anti-slop audit and five-dimension critique. The current build is in staging. Give me a PASS/REVISION/BLOCKED verdict.We have a slide deck exported to HTML for a client demo tomorrow. Use the presentation critique skill to check it. Focus on specificity and restraint. Flag any P0 blockers.description: "Review a WebsitePresent delivery before declaring it ready. Use when an HTML presentation, redesign, or motion-heavy page is about to be called done and needs checklist validation plus a five-dimension critique."
Presentation Critique
Use this skill before claiming a presentation artifact is complete.
This skill exists to make “looks okay” insufficient. It turns review into a real gate grounded in checklist evidence and a short, explicit critique rubric.
Read first
Before reviewing, read:
references/checklist.mdreferences/five-dimensions.mdreferences/anti-ai-slop.md
What this skill does
This skill checks whether a presentation output is:
- directionally faithful,
- structurally speakable,
- visually coherent,
- specific to the actual task,
- restrained enough to stay credible.
It does not replace implementation validation. It sits on top of implementation validation and raises the quality floor.
Workflow
1. Confirm the target being reviewed
Be clear about:
- which task
- which version
- which output surface
- what this round intended to improve
Without that, critique becomes vague and unfair.
2. Run the checklist gate
Use references/checklist.md.
Treat P0 as mandatory. If a P0 item fails, the work is not ready.
P1 items should normally be addressed before release unless the user explicitly accepts them. P2 items are improvement opportunities, not automatic blockers.
3. Run the five-dimension critique
Use references/five-dimensions.md.
Judge the output on:
- Fit
- Hierarchy
- Execution
- Specificity
- Restraint
If any one dimension is clearly weak, call it out directly and recommend where it should be repaired.
4. Run the anti-slop audit
Use references/anti-ai-slop.md.
The goal is not aesthetic purity. The goal is to catch lazy defaults, generic polish, fake specificity, and decorative excess before they ship.
5. Produce a release verdict
End with one of these:
- PASS
- REVISION_NEEDED
- BLOCKED
Do not soften the verdict just to avoid friction.
Output contract
Your review output should include:
- verdict
- blocking findings
- non-blocking risks
- strongest positive traits
- weakest dimension
- recommended return path
The return path should name the right owner when possible:
- SourceStrategist
- NarrativeArchitect
- ExperienceDirector
- MotionDirector
- FrontendProducer
- ReviewGuardian
Principles
- Evidence before vibes.
- P0 means mandatory, not aspirational.
- Specific critique beats broad praise.
- A pass still needs a reason.
- A block still needs a path forward.
What to avoid
- passing work because it is “mostly there”,
- only commenting on aesthetics,
- using generic praise instead of a real verdict,
- ignoring whether the page actually supports live explanation,
- treating anti-slop items as optional style preferences.
TDD Red-Green-Refactor
Testing
Skill qui guide Claude a travers le cycle TDD complet.
Audit d'Accessibilité Web
Testing
Réalise un audit d'accessibilité web complet selon les normes WCAG.
Générateur de Tests UAT
Testing
Génère des cas de test d'acceptation utilisateur structurés et complets.