Now liveThe Skillselion MCP - thousands of ranked skills, loaded into your agent mid-task. No install.Get it →
pixel-process-ug avatar

Ux Researcher Designer

  • 66 installs
  • 1 repo stars
  • Updated March 16, 2026
  • pixel-process-ug/superkit-agents

Helps with design & ui/ux tasks.

About

ux-researcher-designer is a Claude Code skill for design & ui/ux. It helps solo builders move faster with AI-assisted development.

  • ux-researcher-designer
  • Design & UI/UX
  • AI-coding skill

Ux Researcher Designer by the numbers

  • 66 all-time installs (skills.sh)
  • Ranked #1,193 of 1,880 Design & UI/UX skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
  • Data as of Jul 18, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
npx skills add https://github.com/pixel-process-ug/superkit-agents --skill ux-researcher-designer

Add your badge

Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.

Listed on Skillselion
Installs66
repo stars1
Last updatedMarch 16, 2026
Repositorypixel-process-ug/superkit-agents

What it does

Helps with design & ui/ux tasks.

Files

SKILL.mdMarkdownGitHub ↗

UX Researcher & Designer

Overview

Apply systematic UX research and design methods to understand users, validate assumptions, and create evidence-based designs. This skill covers the full research-to-design pipeline: discovery research, persona creation, journey mapping, information architecture, usability testing, and heuristic evaluation.

Phase 1: Discovery Research

1. Define research objectives and questions 2. Select appropriate research methods 3. Recruit participants (5-8 per segment for qualitative) 4. Conduct research sessions 5. Synthesize findings using affinity mapping

STOP — Present research plan with objectives and methods for user approval.

Research Method Selection Decision Table

Generative (Discovery) Methods
MethodWhen to UseParticipantsDurationCost
User InterviewsUnderstanding motivations, behaviors, pain points5-8 per segment45-60 min eachMedium
Contextual InquiryObserving users in their natural environment4-61-2 hours eachHigh
Diary StudiesLongitudinal behavior patterns10-151-4 weeksMedium
SurveysQuantitative validation of qualitative findings100+5-10 minLow
Focus GroupsExploring attitudes and preferences6-10 per group60-90 minMedium
Evaluative Methods
MethodWhen to UseParticipantsDurationCost
Usability TestingValidating designs against tasks5-830-60 min eachMedium
A/B TestingComparing two design variants1000+ per variant1-4 weeksLow
Card SortingOrganizing information architecture15-3020-30 minLow
Tree TestingValidating navigation structure50+10-15 minLow
First Click TestingEvaluating initial user instincts30+5-10 minLow
Heuristic EvaluationExpert review without users3-5 evaluators1-2 hoursLow
Method Selection Decision Table
SituationRecommended MethodWhy
No idea who users areInterviews + contextual inquiryDeep understanding needed
Have assumptions to validateSurveys + usability testingQuantitative confirmation
Redesigning navigationCard sorting + tree testingStructure-focused
Evaluating existing productHeuristic evaluation + usability testFind problems fast
Comparing two designsA/B testingStatistical comparison
Limited budget/timeHeuristic evaluationNo participants needed
Long-term behavior understandingDiary studyCaptures patterns over time

Interview Guide Template

1. Introduction (5 min)
   - Thank participant, explain purpose
   - Get consent for recording
   - "There are no wrong answers"

2. Warm-up (5 min)
   - Background questions about role/context
   - Current tools and workflows

3. Core Questions (30 min)
   - Open-ended questions about behaviors
   - Follow-up probes: "Tell me more about..."
   - Critical incident: "Describe a time when..."
   - Avoid leading questions

4. Wrap-up (5 min)
   - "Is there anything I didn't ask that you think is important?"
   - Thank and explain next steps

Phase 2: Analysis and Modeling

1. Create user personas from research data 2. Map user journey for key scenarios 3. Define information architecture 4. Identify pain points and opportunities 5. Prioritize using impact/effort matrix

STOP — Present personas and journey map for review before design validation.

Persona Template

# [Persona Name]

## Demographics
- Age: [range]
- Occupation: [role]
- Technical proficiency: [low/medium/high]
- Usage frequency: [daily/weekly/monthly]

## Goals
1. Primary goal: [what they are trying to achieve]
2. Secondary goal: [supporting objective]
3. Tertiary goal: [nice-to-have]

## Pain Points
1. [Frustration with current process]
2. [Unmet need]
3. [Workaround they have created]

## Behaviors
- [How they currently solve the problem]
- [Tools and methods they use]
- [Decision-making patterns]

## Quotes (from research)
- "[Verbatim quote that captures their perspective]"
- "[Another representative quote]"

## Scenario
[A paragraph describing a typical day/task where they would use the product]

Persona Quality Decision Table

CheckPassFail
Based on real research dataQuotes and behaviors from interviewsInvented or assumed behaviors
Actionable for designSpecific goals and pain pointsVague "wants to be productive"
Distinct from other personasDifferent goals, behaviors, constraintsOverlapping with another persona
Number of personas2-4 primaryMore than 5 (too many to design for)

Journey Map Structure

Stages:     Awareness -> Consideration -> Onboarding -> Usage -> Advocacy
                |              |             |          |          |
Actions:   [What they do at each stage]
                |              |             |          |          |
Thoughts:  [What they are thinking]
                |              |             |          |          |
Emotions:  [Frustration/neutral/delight mapped to each stage]
                |              |             |          |          |
Pain Points: [Friction and frustration points]
                |              |             |          |          |
Opportunities: [Design opportunities to improve]
                |              |             |          |          |
Touchpoints: [Channels and interfaces involved]

Journey Map Elements

  • Moments of Truth: Critical points where users form lasting impressions
  • Service Blueprints: Front-stage actions mapped to back-stage processes
  • Emotion Curve: Visual line showing emotional highs and lows
  • Gap Analysis: Difference between current and desired experience

Heuristic Evaluation (Nielsen's 10)

#HeuristicWhat to Look For
1Visibility of system statusLoading indicators, progress bars, save confirmations
2Match with real worldNatural language, familiar metaphors, logical order
3User control and freedomUndo, cancel, back, escape hatches
4Consistency and standardsSame action = same result, platform conventions
5Error preventionConfirmation dialogs, constraints, smart defaults
6Recognition over recallVisible options, contextual help, recent history
7Flexibility and efficiencyShortcuts, customization, bulk actions
8Aesthetic and minimalist designNo unnecessary information, clear hierarchy
9Help users with errorsPlain language errors, specific cause, suggest fix
10Help and documentationSearchable, task-oriented, concise

Severity Rating Scale

RatingDescriptionAction
0Not a usability problemNo action
1Cosmetic onlyFix if time allows
2Minor problemLow priority fix
3Major problemHigh priority, fix before launch
4Usability catastropheMust fix immediately

Phase 3: Design Validation

1. Create testable prototypes (low or high fidelity) 2. Plan usability testing sessions 3. Conduct tests with 5+ participants 4. Analyze results and iterate 5. Document findings and recommendations

STOP — Present usability test results and recommendations for review.

Prototype Fidelity Decision Table

SituationFidelityToolWhy
Early concept validationLow (paper/wireframe)Balsamiq, paperFast iteration, low commitment
Navigation testingMedium (clickable)Figma prototypeTest flow without visual polish
Visual design validationHigh (pixel-perfect)Figma, coded prototypeTest actual look and feel
Interaction validationHigh (coded)HTML/CSS/JS prototypeTest real interactions

A/B Testing Methodology

StepDetails
Hypothesis"Changing [X] will [improve/decrease] [metric] because [reason]"
Sample sizePower analysis (95% confidence, 80% power)
DurationMinimum 2 full business cycles (2+ weeks)
Variable controlTest one change at a time
AnalysisStatistical significance (p < 0.05)

Common UX Metrics

MetricWhat It MeasuresBenchmark
Task success rate% completing target task> 78% (acceptable)
Time on taskDuration to complete actionVaries by task
Error rateMistakes per task< 10%
System Usability Scale (SUS)Overall usability score68 = average
Net Promoter Score (NPS)Likelihood to recommend> 0 = good, > 50 = excellent
Customer Effort Score (CES)Ease of experience> 5/7

Information Architecture

Card Sort Analysis Decision Table
Sort TypeWhen to UseAnalysis Method
Open sortDiscovery — users create categoriesSimilarity matrix, dendrogram
Closed sortValidation — sort into predefined categoriesCategory agreement percentage
Hybrid sortBoth — predefined with ability to add newCombined analysis
Navigation Patterns
PatternUse Case
Global navigationPersistent across all pages
Local navigationWithin a section
Contextual navigationRelated content links
Utility navigationSettings, account, help
BreadcrumbsLocation within hierarchy

Deliverables Checklist

  • [ ] Research plan with objectives and methods
  • [ ] Participant recruitment screener
  • [ ] Interview/test script
  • [ ] Affinity map of findings
  • [ ] Personas (2-4 primary)
  • [ ] Journey map for key scenario
  • [ ] Information architecture diagram
  • [ ] Usability test report with severity ratings
  • [ ] Prioritized recommendations with evidence

Anti-Patterns / Common Mistakes

Anti-PatternWhy It Is WrongWhat to Do Instead
Designing without researchAssumptions lead to wrong designsStart with discovery research
Testing with colleaguesBiased, know too much about productRecruit external participants
Asking users what they wantUsers cannot predict behaviorObserve what they do instead
Confirmation biasOnly seeing what supports beliefsUse structured analysis, multiple evaluators
Too many personas (5+)Cannot design for everyoneKeep to 2-4 primary personas
Skipping synthesisRaw data is not insightsAlways do affinity mapping
Underpowered A/B testsResults are meaningless noiseCalculate sample size before starting
Presenting findings without recommendationsResearch without action is wastedAlways include prioritized next steps

Integration Points

SkillIntegration
ui-ux-pro-maxUX guidelines and design patterns
mobile-designMobile usability testing patterns
planningResearch plan is part of the implementation plan
spec-writingUser research informs JTBD specifications
prd-generationPersonas and journey maps feed into PRDs
llm-as-judgeEvaluate design quality with rubrics

Skill Type

FLEXIBLE — Select and combine research methods based on project constraints (budget, timeline, access to users). Lightweight methods (heuristic evaluation, guerrilla testing) are acceptable when full research is impractical.

Related skills

This week in AI coding

Five minutes, every Monday - the tools, releases and tactics for developers.

unsubscribe anytime.