Overview
This is a skill for UX design analysis and recommendation generation. It uses the Fan-out/Fan-in pattern to analyze three dimensions (heuristic evaluation, accessibility review, user flow analysis) in parallel, then integrates the results to present a prioritized improvement roadmap.
It analyzes a product's user experience (UX) across multiple dimensions and provides actionable improvement recommendations.
Trigger Keywords
UX design, user experience, UX analysis, heuristic evaluation, heuristic assessment, accessibility, accessibility, usability, user flow, wireframe, UX research, UI/UX review, design improvement
Workflow
Step 1: Product Context Analysis
Check the product type (Web App, Mobile App, Desktop Software, Physical Product), target users (age, technical proficiency, disabilities, primary language), design goals (improve conversion rate, reduce churn, increase satisfaction, onboard new users), and existing screens (Wireframe, Mockup, actual screen captures).
Step 2: Fan-out - Parallel Analysis
Three dimensions perform independent parallel analysis:
Dimension 1: Heuristic Evaluation Evaluate based on Nielsen's 10 Usability Heuristics: visibility of system status, match between system and the real world, user control and freedom, consistency and standards, error prevention, recognition rather than recall, flexibility and efficiency of use, aesthetic and minimalist design, help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors, and help and documentation
Dimension 2: Accessibility Review Evaluate using WCAG 2.1 (Level AA) criteria: perceivable (text alternatives, captions, distinguishable, resizeable), operable (keyboard accessible, enough time, photosensitivity, navigable), understandable (readable, predictable, input assistance), robust (compatible, markup)
Dimension 3: User Flow Analysis Analyze the user journey: entry paths, critical paths, identifying barriers (Friction Points), edge cases, exit points
Step 3: Fan-in - Result Integration
Perform correlation analysis (identify duplicate issues and interdependencies across dimensions), severity rating (Critical, Serious, Minor, Cosmetic), impact assessment (business impact), and priority determination (severity × impact × resolution cost).
Step 4: Priority Assessment
Determine priorities using the RICE framework or MoSCoW method:
- RICE Score = (Reach × Impact × Confidence) / Effort
- MoSCoW: Must Have, Should Have, Could Have, Won't Have
Step 5: Improvement Roadmap Proposal
Create an actionable roadmap by priority: short term (1-2 weeks), mid term (1-3 months), long term (3-6 months)
Usage Examples
Example 1: Improving the payment flow UX of an e-commerce app
- Product: Mobile e-commerce app (Android/iOS)
- Target users: ages 20-40, mobile native
- Design goal: reduce payment abandonment rate (currently 68%)
- Existing screens: Cart → Shipping information → Payment method → Payment complete (4 steps)
Example 2: Improving SaaS dashboard onboarding UX
- Product: B2B SaaS dashboard (web app)
- Target users: non-technical marketers, ages 30-50
- Design goal: improve new user first-week achievement rate from 30% → 60%
- Existing screens: Sign-up → Email verification → Dashboard entry (empty state)
Output format
The UX analysis report includes the following sections:
- Product context
- Fan-out: Analysis results by dimension (heuristic evaluation, accessibility review, user flow analysis)
- Fan-in: Integrated analysis (correlation analysis, prioritization)
- Integrated UX recommendations (P0/P1/P2/P3)
- Improvement roadmap (short-term/mid-term/long-term)
Precautions
Precautions for UX analysis
- User-centered: Define problems from the user's perspective (exclude developer/business perspectives)
- Evidence-based: Support claims with data or user testing
- Actionability: Present actionable improvements, not ideal solutions
- Prioritization: Do not try to solve everything at once; approach by order of impact
- Accessibility by default: Consider accessibility as a baseline for all UX improvements
Avoid common mistakes
- Focusing only on visual design: UX is about usability and experience, not visual design
- Waterfall approach: Experiment quickly rather than following analysis → design → implementation
- Skipping user testing: Analysis alone is not enough; validate with actual user testing
- Generic recommendations: Avoid vague suggestions like "UX improvement"
- Treating accessibility as secondary: Accessibility is not an add-on feature but a baseline requirement
Related skills
| Skill | When to use |
|---|---|
moai-coworker:collab-ux-research |
Prerequisite: when user research is needed |
moai-coworker:collab-spec |
Follow-up: when a UX specification document is needed |
moai-marketer:marketing-landing-page |
Alternative: when landing page UX improvement is needed |
Post-processing chain
The UX analysis report's narrative recommendation section(integrated UX recommendation P0-P3 descriptions, improvement roadmap narrative) only is finalized through the following chain. Table/score data such as severity, RICE, and priority matrix are not subject to refinement:
moai-coworker:collab-ux-design → moai-coworker:ai-slop-reviewer → moai-writer:korean-humanize → 최종 검수
moai-coworker:ai-slop-reviewer: Check and polish AI-specific clichés, exaggeration, and redundancy.moai-writer:korean-humanize: Final refinement into natural Korean sentences.