mohitagw15856
036511ab3e
Broadens both reach (more tools) and content types (an MCP server), continuing the multi-platform story. Windsurf + Aider: - build-exports.mjs gains two platforms: exports/windsurf/*.md (workspace rules, trigger: model_decision) and exports/aider/*.md (conventions for `aider --read`). Now 5 platforms (ChatGPT, Gemini, Cursor, Windsurf, Aider). - install.sh + bin/cli.mjs install both (windsurf -> .windsurf/rules, aider -> .aider/skills with a --read hint); generated README index is excluded from copies. - One-line windsurf-install.sh / aider-install.sh wrappers for parity. MCP server (new content type): - mcp/server.mjs — zero-dependency stdio MCP server exposing list_skills, search_skills, get_skill. Published as a second bin (pm-claude-skills-mcp). Logs to stderr; reads bundled skills/ at startup. mcp/README.md documents client config. Also: README hero "See it in action" demo placement (ready to swap in a GIF; recording guide in web/docs-assets/README.md), Works-With table + exports + install docs updated, CHANGELOG Unreleased. package.json files/bin updated. Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016JWn5jRD5tcEFKrubjQ6Px Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
3.0 KiB
3.0 KiB
trigger, description
| trigger | description |
|---|---|
| model_decision | Runs a structured PM design review against product requirements. Use when asked to review a Figma design, check a design against requirements, or assess whether a design meets the product spec. Produces a requirements coverage check, UX concerns, open questions, and an explicit approval status — approved, approved with conditions, or not approved. |
Figma Design Review Skill
Runs a structured PM design review — checking that a design meets product requirements, covers all user flows, and is ready for engineering. This is a requirements-and-outcomes review, not an aesthetic critique.
Required Inputs
- Design description or screen summary
- Original requirements (PRD snippet, ticket, or acceptance criteria)
- User flow being designed
- Review stage (concept / mid-fidelity / pre-handoff final)
Output Structure
1. Review Header
Feature, review stage, reviewed by, date. Overall status: Approved / Approved with changes / Needs revision
2. Requirements Coverage Check
| Requirement | Covered? | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| [Requirement from PRD] | Yes/No/Partial | [Specific observation] |
Missing coverage summary: [Requirements not addressed — must resolve before approval]
3. User Flow Completeness
| Flow step | Designed? | Issues |
|---|---|---|
| [Step] | Yes/No/Partial | [Issue] |
| Error state | Yes/No | |
| Empty state | Yes/No | |
| Loading state | Yes/No |
4. PM Concerns
[Concern] — Blocking / Should fix / Nice to fix
- What: [Specific observation]
- Why it matters: [Business or user impact — not aesthetic preference]
- Suggested resolution: [What PM wants to see]
5. Open Questions
| Question | Owner | Needed by |
|---|---|---|
| [Question] | Designer/Eng/PM | [Date] |
6. Approval Decision
Approved / Approved with changes (list) / Needs revision (focus area + next review date)
Quality Checks
- Every requirement assessed
- All flow states checked (error, empty, loading)
- Concerns are outcome-focused not aesthetic
- Open questions have owners
- Approval status is explicit
Anti-Patterns
- Do not review a design without a list of requirements to check against — always ask for the PRD, design brief, or acceptance criteria first
- Do not give a vague approval status — the decision must be explicitly "approved", "approved with conditions", or "not approved"
- Do not conflate requirements gaps with UX concerns — track them separately so engineers and designers can act independently
- Do not raise concerns without suggesting what information is needed to resolve them
- Do not skip open questions — unresolved assumptions at review time become bugs after engineering handoff
Example Trigger Phrases
- "Review this Figma design against the requirements"
- "Do a PM design review for [feature]"
- "Check if this design meets the product spec"
- "Is this design ready to hand off to engineering?"
- "What is missing from this design before we can build it?"