本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

interface-redesign

Upgrades an existing interface to a higher standard without rebuilding it — auditing what is there, identifying what reads as generic or unfinished, and sequencing changes by impact. Use this when a product works but looks dated or default, when a redesign is being considered, when deciding whether to restyle or rebuild, or when a screen needs to look substantially better with limited effort.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(2)

  • SKILL.md3.2 KB
  • references/sources.md2.1 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Interface redesign

Most interfaces do not need rebuilding. They need a dozen specific things fixed, in the right order.

Audit first

Go through the real product, on a real device, doing a real task. Record what you find in these categories — the order is the priority order:

  1. Structural — unclear primary action, competing focal points, navigation that does not match the mental model. These are the only ones worth a rebuild.
  2. Systemic — inconsistent spacing, more type sizes than a scale would allow, palette drift, components that exist in variants. High impact, mechanical to fix.
  3. Craft — weak hierarchy, poor contrast, unfinished states, cramped density.
  4. Cosmetic — dated shadows, default border radii, stock illustration.

The generic-AI-product tells

These are the specific things that make a product read as unconsidered. They are worth naming because they are all cheap to fix:

  • Default framework styling left in place — the untouched button, the starter-template card.
  • One accent color used for every emphasis, so nothing is emphasized.
  • Uniform spacing everywhere, so nothing groups.
  • Centered everything, including body copy.
  • Emoji standing in for iconography.
  • Gradients on surfaces that carry no meaning.
  • Empty and error states that were never designed.

Sequencing

Fix in this order, because each makes the next easier to see:

  1. Tokens — spacing scale, type scale, palette. This alone resolves most systemic findings.
  2. Hierarchy on the two or three highest-traffic screens.
  3. States: empty, loading, error, overflow.
  4. Component consolidation.
  5. Cosmetic pass.

Restyle or rebuild

Rebuild only when the structure is wrong — when the information architecture does not match how people work. Everything else is a restyle, and a restyle that ships beats a rebuild that stalls.

Sources

references/sources.md in this skill lists the outside authorities that settle the questions here — what each one is authoritative for, and what you may do with it. Check them before answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. Most are free to read and not free to reproduce; the use note on each is binding.

Never

  • Restyle a screen whose problem is structural. New paint on a broken flow buys nothing.
  • Change navigation and visual language in the same release. When something breaks you will not know which one did it.
  • Remove a path because it looks unused without checking who uses it and what they do next.
  • Ship a redesign with no way back. Keep the old path reachable until the new one is proven.

Return contract

Findings by category with severity, the sequenced plan, what you would do first if only one day were available, and what you deliberately are not touching.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Designs and audits who can reach what — authentication, authorization models, privileged access, service credentials, and joiner-mover-leaver process. Use this to design a permissions model, run an access review, reduce standing privilege, handle offboarding, set up SSO or MFA, manage service and machine credentials, or diagnose why permissions have sprawled.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0282026年9月18日 更新

Concentrates marketing and sales effort on a named set of accounts rather than on volume — qualifying whether the model fits your economics at all, building the account list and the buying group inside each, tiering effort against account value, coordinating so the account experiences one campaign rather than several, and measuring account progression instead of leads. Use this to decide whether to run an account-based program, build one, or work out why an existing one produces activity and no pipeline.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0282026年9月18日 更新

Gets new users from signup to first real value — signup flow, onboarding, time-to-value, and the early experience that determines whether someone becomes a user or a lapsed account. Use this to design or fix signup and onboarding, diagnose why signups do not convert to active use, reduce time-to-value, or decide what a new user must accomplish first.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0282026年9月18日 更新

Designs orchestrator-and-subagent hierarchies for a repository — splitting agents by exclusive write surface, pairing every producer with an independent auditor, and enforcing the split with a script that runs in CI. Use this whenever the user wants to set up, expand, audit, or fix a multi-agent or subagent structure for a codebase; asks how to divide work between agents; wants agent charters, roles, or a surface map written; or is hitting agents that collide on the same files, review their own work, or drift from their remit. Also use when sizing a roster or deciding whether a new agent is justified.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0282026年9月18日 更新

Governs models and AI systems in production — intended use, evaluation, monitoring, human oversight, documentation, and the decision to deploy or retire. Use this before deploying a model or AI feature, when defining evaluation criteria, when a model's behavior has drifted, when assessing AI risk or regulatory exposure, or when deciding whether an AI system is fit for a consequential decision.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0282026年9月18日 更新

Produces executive-level research — market sizing, competitor mapping, trend analysis, and strategic intelligence — grounded in cited sources with the confidence in each claim made explicit. Use this to analyze a market or industry, map competitors, evaluate a market-entry or build-versus-buy decision, produce a research brief, or assemble evidence for a decision. Also use when comparing options that need a structured, evidence-based verdict rather than an opinion.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0282026年9月18日 更新

cbrock84 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する