Design Evaluation & Audit

Table of Contents

• [Skill Boundaries](#skill-boundaries)
• [Design Review Workflow](#design-review-workflow)
• [Path Selection Menu](#path-selection-menu)

- [Path 1: Run Cognitive Design Checklist](#path-1-run-cognitive-design-checklist) - [Path 2: Run Visualization Audit](#path-2-run-visualization-audit) - [Path 3: Combined Review](#path-3-combined-review)

• [Quick Reference](#quick-reference)
• [Guardrails](#guardrails)

Skill Boundaries

Use instead of this skill for:

• Creating new designs from scratch: use cognitive-design
• Learning cognitive theory: use cognitive-design Path 1
• Detecting misleading visualizations: use cognitive-fallacies-guard

Design Review Workflow

Time: 30-90 minutes depending on scope

Copy this checklist and track your progress:

Design Evaluation Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Systematic Assessment
- [ ] Step 2: Visualization Quality Audit (if applicable)
- [ ] Step 3: Severity Classification & Prioritization
- [ ] Step 4: Fix Recommendations

Step 1: Systematic Assessment

Apply the Cognitive Design Checklist across all 8 dimensions: Visibility, Visual Hierarchy, Chunking, Simplicity, Memory Support, Feedback, Consistency, Scanning Patterns. Check every item. Record pass/fail for each dimension with specific evidence.

Resource: [Cognitive Design Checklist](resources/cognitive-checklist.md)

Step 2: Visualization Quality Audit (if applicable)

If the design includes data visualizations, apply the 4-Criteria Visualization Audit. Score each criterion 1-5: Clarity, Efficiency, Integrity, Aesthetics. Calculate average and identify weakest dimension.

Resource: [Visualization Audit Framework](resources/visualization-audit.md)

Step 3: Severity Classification & Prioritization

Classify every finding by severity:

• CRITICAL: Integrity violations, accessibility failures, users cannot complete core tasks. Fix immediately.
• HIGH: Clarity/efficiency issues preventing use, missing feedback for critical actions, working memory overload (>10 ungrouped items). Fix before launch.
• MEDIUM: Suboptimal patterns, aesthetic issues, minor inconsistencies. Fix in next iteration.
• LOW: Minor optimizations, polish items. Fix when convenient.

Priority rule: Fix foundation-first — perception before coherence, integrity before aesthetics, critical before high.

Step 4: Fix Recommendations

For each finding, document:

1. What is wrong — specific description with evidence
2. Why it matters — which cognitive principle is violated
3. How to fix — concrete, actionable recommendation
4. Expected outcome — what improves after the fix
5. Effort estimate — quick fix (minutes), moderate (hours), significant (days)

Verify fixes don't harm other dimensions.

Path Selection Menu

Path 1: Run Cognitive Design Checklist

Choose this when: Evaluating any interface, layout, content page, form, or general design.

What you'll get: Pass/fail across 8 cognitive dimensions, test methods, common failures, severity-classified findings.

Time: 20-40 minutes

→ [Go to Cognitive Design Checklist](resources/cognitive-checklist.md)

Path 2: Run Visualization Audit

Choose this when: Evaluating data visualizations — charts, graphs, dashboards, infographics.

What you'll get: 1-5 scores on Clarity, Efficiency, Integrity, Aesthetics with pass/fail threshold.

Time: 15-30 minutes per visualization

→ [Go to Visualization Audit Framework](resources/visualization-audit.md)

Path 3: Combined Review

Choose this when: Comprehensive review covering both interface elements and data visualizations.

Process: Run Cognitive Checklist first, then Visualization Audit on each data component, merge findings, produce unified fix list.

Time: 45-90 minutes

→ Start with [Cognitive Checklist](resources/cognitive-checklist.md), then [Visualization Audit](resources/visualization-audit.md)

Quick Reference

3-Question Rapid Check

1. Attention — "Is it obvious what to look at first?"

• If NO: hierarchy and visibility issues

2. Memory — "Is the user required to remember anything that could be shown?"

• If NO: memory support and chunking issues

3. Clarity — "Can someone unfamiliar understand in 5 seconds?"

• If NO: simplicity and comprehension issues

All YES = likely cognitively sound. Any NO = run full checklist on the failing area.

Guardrails

Out of scope: Creating designs, teaching theory, providing domain guidance, replacing user testing, or covering full accessibility compliance.

In scope: Systematic evaluation against cognitive principles, severity-classified findings, prioritized fix recommendations, and visualization quality scoring.