Overview

What It Helps You Do

Evaluate interface designs through the lens of specific operator personas, surfacing insights grounded in documented user profiles rather than generic UX advice.

Activate it with:

• /persona-review
• Phrases like "review this design for [persona]"
• Related requests about persona review, operator UX critique, or design evaluation by role

It is especially useful when you need to:

• Review designs for specific user roles (e.g., air-surveillance-tech, weapons-director)
• Assess whether an interface supports documented workflows and responsibilities
• Identify how design choices affect cognitive load in high-tempo environments
• Validate that system visibility matches the tools operators actually use
• Check that communication patterns align with how operators relay information

When to Use

Use this skill when:

• Reviewing UX for specific user roles documented in persona profiles
• Conducting design reviews where operational context matters
• Evaluating operator interfaces in high-stakes or high-tempo environments
• Assessing whether designs address documented pain points
• Checking if system integrations align with existing tools operators use

Works with Figma MCP (desktop or URL) and Outline documentation server for supporting context.

How It Works

The skill evaluates designs across six dimensions specific to the operator persona:

• Cognitive load: Information density and visual hierarchy matched to experience level and work tempo
• Communication patterns: Interface support for documented workflows and information relay
• Pain point mitigation: Which documented frustrations the design addresses or creates
• Context awareness: Complexity appropriate for rank, experience, and operational responsibilities
• System visibility: Access to critical systems the operator monitors
• Communication support: Facilitation of documented communication channels

Reviews adapt structure based on findings rather than forcing insights into rigid sections. The output includes connections to the persona's profile, specific actionable recommendations, and prioritization by operational impact.

Examples

Example: Air Surveillance Dashboard Review

/persona-review "Review this for the air-surveillance-tech persona" [Figma URL]

You get critical findings grounded in the AST's responsibilities, cognitive load assessment for high-tempo track management, pain point analysis (does it reduce context switching between BCS-F and RS-4?), and recommendations prioritized by operational impact.

Good to Know

Good to know: Requires persona profile files in references/personas/. If the requested persona doesn't exist, you'll get a list of available options.

Good to know: Reviews are most valuable with Figma MCP and Outline MCP for full design context and supporting documentation. Without these, the review continues with screenshots or manual inputs.

Good to know: Assumes operators are domain experts. The skill won't suggest simplifications that remove necessary complexity—it evaluates whether complexity serves documented operational needs.

Prerequisites

• Persona profile files in references/personas/ with documented responsibilities, pain points, systems, and communication patterns
• Ideally: Figma MCP (desktop or URL access) for design context
• Ideally: Outline MCP for supporting documentation

What You Get

A design critique adapted to findings depth and design scope:

• Critical findings: 2-3 most important insights specific to the operator persona
• Detailed evaluation: Assessments across the six dimensions (cognitive load, communication patterns, pain points, context awareness, system visibility, communication support)
• Recommendations: Prioritized, actionable improvements grounded in the persona's operational profile
• Supporting references: Links to relevant documentation

Limits

• Reviews designs for documented persona profiles only—no generic UX reviews
• Without Figma MCP, reviews are limited to visual elements in screenshots
• Without Outline MCP, reviews proceed without organizational standards and supporting documentation
• Provides critique and recommendations, not implementation