consolidate-variations
Compare multiple built UI variations after UAT evidence, interview the user on what works and what does not, resolve conflicts, and produce a final implementation-ready UI specification
- License 许可
- MIT
- 最近更新
- 2026-11-10
- Stars
- ★ 1
- Forks
- 0
01 前言 Front Matter
- name
- consolidate-variations
- type
- planning
- version
- v0.1
- description
- Compare multiple built UI variations after UAT evidence, interview the user on what works and what does not, resolve conflicts, and produce a final implementation-ready UI specification
- argument-hint
- [optional: topic, page, or path to variation specs]
03 SKILL.md 正文
Consolidate Variations
Invoke as $consolidate-variations.
Use this skill after the user has built and evaluated multiple UI layout variations, typically generated via $ux-variations --layout-mode, built via $exec, and evaluated via $uat --variant-evaluation. This skill compares the variations, interviews the user on what works and what does not in each one, cherry-picks the best elements, resolves conflicts where preferred choices are incompatible, and produces a single consolidated implementation-ready UI specification.
Users with manually built variations can also use this skill directly, but consolidation should not happen before the user has reviewed the variants and captured evidence.
Workflow
-
Resolve context
- Read
.agents/project.jsonif it exists. - Read
README.md,AGENTS.md,CLAUDE.md, relevantdocs/,specs/,research/, route files, component directories, and design artifacts when present. - Locate the variation spec:
specs/ui-layout-variations-[topic].mdorspecs/ux-variations-[topic].md. - Locate the content requirements:
specs/ui-requirements-[topic].mdor equivalent content contract. - Locate variant evaluation evidence:
research/uat-variant-evaluation-[topic].md,research/uat-plan.mdresult logs, screenshots, notes, recordings, or explicit user-provided review notes. - Locate built implementations: scan route files, component directories, and any variation-specific directories or branches.
- If the variation spec or implementations cannot be found, ask the user to point to them.
- Read
-
Evidence gate
- If no evaluation evidence exists and the user has not explicitly said they already reviewed the variants and is ready to converge, stop and recommend
$uat --variant-evaluation. - Do not infer a winner from specs alone. Built variants need hands-on review or explicit user readiness before consolidation.
- If some variants are unreviewed, ask whether to exclude them, evaluate them first via
$uat --variant-evaluation, or include them as spec-only references.
- If no evaluation evidence exists and the user has not explicitly said they already reviewed the variants and is ready to converge, stop and recommend
-
Present variation inventory
- List each variation with a one-line summary of its approach.
- Note build status for each: built and reviewed, built but unreviewed, partially built, spec-only.
- Note evidence status for each: result log present, user notes present, no evidence.
- Confirm which variations the user wants to consolidate.
-
Interview per variation
- For each reviewed variation, ask one primary decision question per turn by default. Use short follow-up bullets only when they clarify the same variation decision, not to batch unrelated questions:
- What works well in this variation? Name specific elements, regions, or interactions.
- What does not work? What feels wrong, cluttered, sparse, or confusing?
- Any specific component, region, or interaction to keep in the final design?
- Anything to explicitly reject and never use?
- Record responses as structured annotations per variation:
- Keep: elements the user wants in the final design, with source variation
- Reject: elements the user never wants, with source variation
- Neutral: elements the user has no strong opinion on
- For each reviewed variation, ask one primary decision question per turn by default. Use short follow-up bullets only when they clarify the same variation decision, not to batch unrelated questions:
-
Cross-variation synthesis
- Present a Consolidation Matrix showing each design dimension and which variation's approach the user preferred:
Design Element Variation A Variation B Variation C Winner Container pattern card grid data table list + detail ? Detail view modal sidebar full-page ? Navigation top nav side nav tabs ? - Fill in winners based on UAT evidence and interview responses.
- Mark conflicts where preferred choices from different dimensions are incompatible.
- For each conflict, present the tension, offer 2-3 resolution options with tradeoffs, state a recommendation, and ask the user to resolve it.
- Continue until every row in the matrix has a winner and all conflicts are resolved.
-
Build consolidated prototype
- Merge the best elements from variation prototypes into a single runnable artifact at
prototypes/{topic}/consolidated/. - The consolidated prototype must reflect:
- Layout skeleton: regions, proportions, scroll behavior
- Primary content pattern
- Detail view pattern
- Navigation pattern and placement
- Action placement
- Density and spacing approach
- Responsive behavior at mobile, tablet, and desktop breakpoints
- States rendering
- Ask the user to confirm the consolidated design before building the prototype.
- Merge the best elements from variation prototypes into a single runnable artifact at
-
Coverage checkpoint
- Verify every content requirement from
specs/ui-requirements-[topic].mdhas a UI home in the consolidated spec. - Verify every user action has a placement: button, menu item, keyboard shortcut, or gesture.
- Verify all states are accounted for: empty, loading, error, partial, full, offline, permission-denied.
- Flag any gaps and resolve them before writing.
- Verify every content requirement from
Deliverables
- Write the consolidated prototype to
prototypes/{topic}/consolidated/. - Write the consolidation interview log to
consolidate-variations-[topic]-interview.md.
Alignment Page
Follow the shared Alignment Page convention in CLAUDE.md. Output: alignment/consolidate-variations-{topic}.html.
Constraints
- Do not proceed without evaluation evidence unless the user explicitly says they have reviewed the variants and is ready to converge.
- Do not pick winners without user input. Present the matrix and let the user decide.
- Do not ignore conflicts. If two preferred choices are spatially or functionally incompatible, surface the tension and resolve it explicitly.
- The consolidated spec must be at least as detailed as a
$ui-interviewoutput — implementation-ready, not a summary. - Do not lose content requirements. Every data field, action, and state from the requirements spec must appear in the final design.
- Do not bias toward the first or last variation reviewed. Present them neutrally and let the user's feedback and evaluation evidence drive the outcome.
Archive-First Replacement Policy
- Before replacing or substantively rewriting an existing canonical research/spec document (
research/**/*.md,specs/**/*.md, ordocs/specifications/**/*.md), copy the current file todocs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-relative-path>. - Preserve the archived snapshot exactly as it existed before the change; do not edit the archived copy after creating it.
- After the archive snapshot exists, write the updated document to the original canonical path.
- Report both the archive path and the updated canonical path in the final output.
- New files do not need archive snapshots. Append-only updates do not need archive snapshots unless an existing section is regenerated or rewritten.
Default Shipping Contract
Follow the shared shipping contract convention in CLAUDE.md.
04 同仓库更多 Skills
source-checkout-allowed
Valid source-checkout-only fixture.
deck-install-valid
Valid deck install fixture.
codex-pack-guard-valid
Valid Codex Pack Availability Guard fixture.
codex-missing-skill-valid
Valid Codex missing skill fallback fixture.
codex-base-skill-fallback-valid
Valid Codex base skill fallback fixture.
claude-pack-guard-valid
Valid Claude Pack Availability Guard fixture.