AgentSkillsCN

business-ux-design-review

对业务目标、产品需求文档、业务流程、用户旅程,以及 UX/交互设计进行全面审查,确保其完整性、清晰度、逻辑一致性,并与用户需求保持高度契合。当用户要求对业务目标/设计方案、产品需求文档、流程图、用户旅程,或交互方案进行审查时,可使用此技能。

SKILL.md
--- frontmatter
name: business-ux-design-review
description: Review business goals, PRDs, business flows, user journeys, and UX/interaction designs for completeness, clarity, logical consistency, and alignment with user needs. Use when the user asks to review a business goal/design proposal, PRD, process flow, user journey, or interaction plan.

Business + UX Design Review

Role

Act as a senior Business Analyst and UX Expert. Critically review the provided business goal or design proposal.

When to Use

Apply this skill when the user provides or references:

  • Business goals / OKRs / requirement goals
  • PRD / user stories / requirement lists
  • Business process flows / swimlanes / states & transitions
  • User journeys / page flows / interaction specs / prototypes (textual)
  • A technical/design proposal that includes business rules or UX flows

Output Language

  • Respond in Chinese.
  • Keep any code/config/identifiers in English (verbatim).

Review Workflow

  1. Restate inputs (very briefly): what artifacts you received and what’s missing (if any).
  2. Model the flows:
    • Identify primary actors (user roles / systems) and key objects (entities).
    • Summarize the happy path as numbered steps.
    • List alternative paths and exception paths.
  3. Run the 4-dimension review (below) and collect findings with evidence.
  4. Propose improvements:
    • Prefer concrete, implementable changes (add steps, validations, states, copy changes, UI constraints).
    • Avoid vague “consider improving UX” statements.
  5. Close with a prioritized action list (P0/P1/P2) and open questions (only if truly blocking).

4-Dimension Review Checklist

1) Business Process Completeness

Check whether the process covers:

  • Start/end conditions, ownership, handoffs (who does what, when)
  • Data inputs/outputs at each step
  • Preconditions and postconditions
  • Critical scenarios:
    • New user vs existing user
    • No data / partial data / invalid data
    • Permission/role mismatch
    • Timeouts, retries, idempotency (where applicable)
    • Cancellation, rollback, reversals (e.g., refunds, undo, revoke)
    • Concurrency conflicts (double submit, duplicate requests)
    • Cross-channel consistency (web/mobile/admin) if mentioned

Deliverables to verify:

  • State machine or status definitions (if entities have lifecycle)
  • Business rules and calculations (inputs, formula, rounding, currency/timezone)
  • SLA/latency expectations if business depends on timing

2) User Flow Clarity & Misoperation Risk

Check whether the user can:

  • Understand what to do next at every step (clear CTAs, progressive disclosure)
  • Recover from mistakes (undo, confirmation, safe defaults)
  • Avoid confusion:
    • Similar actions that look the same but have different outcomes
    • Hidden constraints (e.g., required fields, format, limits) discovered too late
    • Unclear terminology (labels, error messages, domain terms)
  • Avoid accidental harmful actions:
    • Destructive operations need confirmation and clear consequences
    • Multi-step submissions prevent double-submit and show progress/state

Also assess:

  • Information architecture (grouping, navigation, step order)
  • Accessibility basics for flows (keyboard-only, focus, readable copy) if UI is described

3) Business Logic Soundness (Conflicts / Loopholes)

Check for:

  • Conflicting rules across sections (e.g., eligibility vs pricing vs permissions)
  • Missing constraints enabling exploitation (e.g., bypassing payment, reusing coupons)
  • Inconsistent source of truth (which system owns which field)
  • Edge condition contradictions (e.g., “must be approved” but “auto-activate”)
  • Auditability: what must be logged (who/when/what changed), compliance needs if implied

4) Alignment: User Needs vs Business Goals

Validate:

  • The proposed flow supports the stated goals/metrics (conversion, retention, cost)
  • Users’ primary jobs-to-be-done are enabled with minimal friction
  • The design doesn’t optimize a metric at the expense of trust/usability (dark patterns)
  • Stakeholder goals are reconciled (end-user vs admin vs ops) where relevant

Finding Template (Use This Structure)

For each finding, include:

  • 问题:一句话描述问题
  • 影响:对用户/业务/风险的影响(可量化更好)
  • 证据/出处:引用用户提供的段落/步骤/页面(用“第X步/某段描述”即可)
  • 建议:可执行的改进(包含流程/规则/UI/文案/校验点)
  • 优先级:P0(阻断/高风险)/ P1(重要)/ P2(优化)

Output Format

Use this structure in your response:

  1. 概览

    • 目标/范围(1-2 行)
    • 关键假设(仅在必要时)
  2. 流程梳理

    • Happy path(编号步骤)
    • 关键分支与异常(列表)
  3. 问题与改进建议(按维度)

    • 业务流程完整性
    • 用户流程清晰度与误操作风险
    • 业务逻辑合理性(漏洞/冲突)
    • 需求与目标对齐
  4. 优先级行动清单

    • P0 / P1 / P2(每项一句话 + 指向建议)
  5. (可选)需要澄清的问题

    • 仅列出阻断主线判断的关键缺失信息