figma-design-review
Compare original and translation side by side
🇺🇸
Original
English🇨🇳
Translation
ChineseFigma Design Review Skill
Figma 设计评审 Skill
Review and score Figma component designs using weighted dual-scoring.
采用加权双评分体系对Figma组件设计进行评审和打分。
Two-Skill Architecture
双Skill架构
figma-design-review (PHASE 1) -> atomic-design (PHASE 2 - Export)
Score components (70/30) Classify level (A/M/O)
Identify issues Generate files
Recommend fixes Extract tokens
Determine export readinessScore >= 70? -> Hand off to atomic-design
figma-design-review (PHASE 1) -> atomic-design (PHASE 2 - Export)
Score components (70/30) Classify level (A/M/O)
Identify issues Generate files
Recommend fixes Extract tokens
Determine export readiness得分≥70?→ 移交至atomic-design处理
Scoring Philosophy
评分理念
| Dimension | Weight | Focus |
|---|---|---|
| Style Guide Implementation | 70% | Code quality, consistency, accessibility |
| LLM Metadata Accessibility | 30% | Documentation for AI code generation |
| 维度 | 权重 | 关注点 |
|---|---|---|
| 风格指南落地 | 70% | 代码质量、一致性、无障碍性 |
| LLM元数据可访问性 | 30% | AI代码生成相关文档 |
When to Use
适用场景
| Trigger | Action |
|---|---|
| Designer selects component | Full design review |
| "Review this component" | Scored report |
| "What's missing?" | Gap analysis |
| "Is this ready for export?" | Export readiness check |
| Score < 80 | Improvement roadmap |
| 触发条件 | 对应操作 |
|---|---|
| 设计师选中组件 | 完整设计评审 |
| 触发“评审此组件”指令 | 生成带评分的报告 |
| 触发“缺少什么?”指令 | 差距分析 |
| 触发“是否可导出?”指令 | 导出就绪性检查 |
| 得分<80 | 生成改进路线图 |
Dimension 1: Style Guide Implementation (70%)
维度1:风格指南落地(占比70%)
Variant Structure (25 pts)
变体结构(25分)
| Criterion | Points |
|---|---|
| Complete variant matrix | 10 |
| Consistent naming (Size=X, State=Y) | 5 |
| TypeScript interface defined | 5 |
| Logical organization | 5 |
| 评估标准 | 分值 |
|---|---|
| 变体矩阵完整 | 10 |
| 命名一致(如Size=X, State=Y) | 5 |
| 已定义TypeScript接口 | 5 |
| 组织逻辑清晰 | 5 |
Token System (25 pts)
Token体系(25分)
| Criterion | Points |
|---|---|
| CSS Variables for colors | 10 |
| CSS Variables for typography | 5 |
| CSS Variables for spacing | 5 |
| Semantic token naming | 5 |
| 评估标准 | 分值 |
|---|---|
| 使用CSS Variables定义颜色 | 10 |
| 使用CSS Variables定义排版 | 5 |
| 使用CSS Variables定义间距 | 5 |
| Token命名语义化 | 5 |
Visual Consistency (20 pts)
视觉一致性(20分)
| Criterion | Points |
|---|---|
| Consistent font-weight | 5 |
| Consistent border-radius | 5 |
| Consistent padding/spacing | 5 |
| No layout artifacts | 5 |
| 评估标准 | 分值 |
|---|---|
| 字体粗细一致 | 5 |
| 圆角大小一致 | 5 |
| 内边距/间距一致 | 5 |
| 无布局异常 | 5 |
Accessibility States (20 pts)
无障碍状态(20分)
| Criterion | Points |
|---|---|
| Focus state present | 8 |
| Disabled state | 6 |
| Hover state | 4 |
| Touch target >= 44px | 2 |
| 评估标准 | 分值 |
|---|---|
| 包含焦点状态 | 8 |
| 包含禁用状态 | 6 |
| 包含悬停状态 | 4 |
| 触摸目标≥44px | 2 |
Code Quality (10 pts)
代码质量(10分)
| Criterion | Points |
|---|---|
| No duplication | 5 |
| Clean conditionals | 3 |
| Proper defaults | 2 |
| 评估标准 | 分值 |
|---|---|
| 无代码重复 | 5 |
| 条件判断简洁 | 3 |
| 配置合理默认值 | 2 |
Dimension 2: LLM Metadata Accessibility (30%)
维度2:LLM元数据可访问性(占比30%)
Component Description (20 pts)
组件描述(20分)
| Criterion | Points |
|---|---|
| Primary description | 10 |
| Use case specified | 5 |
| Business context | 5 |
| 评估标准 | 分值 |
|---|---|
| 包含核心描述 | 10 |
| 明确使用场景 | 5 |
| 说明业务背景 | 5 |
Searchability (15 pts)
可搜索性(15分)
| Criterion | Points |
|---|---|
| Tags present | 8 |
| Tags comprehensive | 7 |
| 评估标准 | 分值 |
|---|---|
| 包含标签 | 8 |
| 标签覆盖全面 | 7 |
Development Metadata (25 pts)
开发元数据(25分)
| Criterion | Points |
|---|---|
| testId | 5 |
| ariaLabel | 5 |
| analytics | 5 |
| category | 5 |
| level | 5 |
| 评估标准 | 分值 |
|---|---|
| 包含testId | 5 |
| 包含ariaLabel | 5 |
| 包含analytics配置 | 5 |
| 包含分类信息 | 5 |
| 包含级别信息 | 5 |
Usage Guidelines (20 pts)
使用指南(20分)
| Criterion | Points |
|---|---|
| Do's list | 7 |
| Don'ts list | 7 |
| Notes | 6 |
| 评估标准 | 分值 |
|---|---|
| 包含“Do's”列表 | 7 |
| 包含“Don'ts”列表 | 7 |
| 包含注意事项 | 6 |
Technical Specs (20 pts)
技术规格(20分)
| Criterion | Points |
|---|---|
| Design tokens documented | 8 |
| Specs (minWidth, etc.) | 6 |
| A11y requirements | 6 |
| 评估标准 | 分值 |
|---|---|
| 已记录设计Token | 8 |
| 明确规格参数(如minWidth等) | 6 |
| 说明无障碍要求 | 6 |
Score Interpretation
得分解读
| Score | Grade | Export Status |
|---|---|---|
| 90-100 | Excellent | Ready |
| 80-89 | Good | Ready with notes |
| 70-79 | Acceptable | Fix critical first |
| 60-69 | Needs Work | Not ready |
| < 60 | Poor | Major rework |
| 得分区间 | 等级 | 导出状态 |
|---|---|---|
| 90-100 | 优秀 | 可直接导出 |
| 80-89 | 良好 | 可导出,附备注 |
| 70-79 | 合格 | 先修复关键问题 |
| 60-69 | 需要改进 | 暂不可导出 |
| < 60 | 较差 | 需要大幅重构 |
Report Output Format
报告输出格式
markdown
undefinedmarkdown
undefinedComponent Evaluation: [Name]
组件评估:[组件名称]
Style Guide Implementation: [XX]/100
风格指南落地得分:[XX]/100
Strengths:
- [Positive finding]
Weaknesses:
- [Issue] -> Fix: [Solution]
优势:
- [正面发现]
不足:
- [问题点] → 修复方案: [解决办法]
LLM Metadata: [XX]/100
LLM元数据得分:[XX]/100
Includes:
- [Present metadata]
Missing:
- [Missing metadata]
已包含:
- [已有的元数据]
缺失项:
- [缺失的元数据]
Final Weighted Score
最终加权得分
| Criterion | Score | Weight | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implementation | XX | 70% | XX.X |
| LLM Accessibility | XX | 30% | XX.X |
| Total | XX.X/100 |
| 评估项 | 得分 | 权重 | 贡献分 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 风格落地 | XX | 70% | XX.X |
| LLM可访问性 | XX | 30% | XX.X |
| 总分 | XX.X/100 |
Recommendations:
建议:
- [Recommendation] - [explanation]
---- [具体建议] - [说明]
---Review Framework
评审框架
Step 1: Extract Data
步骤1:提取数据
- Name/structure from Figma
- Code from get_design_context
- Screenshot from get_screenshot
- Metadata from description
- 从Figma提取名称/结构
- 从get_design_context获取代码
- 从get_screenshot获取截图
- 从描述中提取元数据
Step 2: Evaluate Implementation (70%)
步骤2:评估风格落地(70%)
- Variant count: expected vs actual
- Token usage check
- Visual consistency
- Accessibility states
- Code quality
- 变体数量:预期值 vs 实际值
- Token使用情况检查
- 视觉一致性校验
- 无障碍状态检查
- 代码质量评估
Step 3: Evaluate LLM Accessibility (30%)
步骤3:评估LLM可访问性(30%)
- Description present?
- Tags comprehensive?
- Dev metadata complete?
- Usage guidelines?
- Technical specs?
- 是否包含组件描述?
- 标签是否全面?
- 开发元数据是否完整?
- 是否包含使用指南?
- 是否包含技术规格?
Step 4: Calculate
步骤4:计算得分
implementation_score = variant + token + visual + a11y + code
llm_score = desc + search + dev + usage + specs
weighted = (implementation * 0.7) + (llm * 0.3)implementation_score = variant + token + visual + a11y + code
llm_score = desc + search + dev + usage + specs
weighted = (implementation * 0.7) + (llm * 0.3)Step 5: Generate Report
步骤5:生成报告
- Strengths (max 6)
- Weaknesses (max 5, each with fix)
- Recommendations by priority
- Export readiness
- 优势(最多6项)
- 不足(最多5项,每项附修复方案)
- 按优先级排序的建议
- 导出就绪状态
Key Rules
核心规则
- Every weakness MUST include a fix
- Every issue MUST name specific field
- Strengths capped at 6
- Weaknesses capped at 5
- Recommendations ordered by priority
- English only
- 每一项不足必须附带修复方案
- 每一个问题必须明确指出具体字段
- 优势项最多6个
- 不足项最多5个
- 建议按优先级排序
- 报告仅支持英文
References
参考资料
| File | Purpose |
|---|---|
| references/audit-summary-format.md | Output format |
| references/scoring-rubric.md | Scoring criteria |
| references/common-issues.md | Frequent problems |
| ../atomic-design/SKILL.md | Export skill |
| 文件 | 用途 |
|---|---|
| references/audit-summary-format.md | 输出格式参考 |
| references/scoring-rubric.md | 评分标准参考 |
| references/common-issues.md | 常见问题参考 |
| ../atomic-design/SKILL.md | 导出Skill参考 |