UX provocation

Pressure test the dominant UX hypothesis before the team locks in a direction too early.

Canonical skill profile. This page is generated from the repository contract. The linked SKILL.md remains the source of authority.

Jump to

• Overview
• When to use
• When not to use
• Core moves
• Expected output
• Verification
• Handoff signals
• Pairs well with
• Anti-patterns

View the canonical contract on GitHub.

Overview

Use this skill to challenge the hidden assumption doing the most work in a UX decision.

When to Use

• teams converging too fast
• solutions that feel cleaner than the problem deserves
• pre-decision pressure testing

When NOT to Use

• as performative contrarianism
• when the team already has strong evidence and just needs implementation

Core Moves

1. Acknowledge what is strong in the current idea.
2. Name the key assumption underneath it.
3. Ask what must be true for it to work.
4. State the failure mode if that assumption breaks.

Optional Modules

• Edge-case probe — Test whether the concept fails under a difficult but realistic condition.
• Role inversion — View the decision from another user or stakeholder position.
• Decision question — Reduce the debate to the one question that still blocks confidence.

Activation Triggers

• Use edge-case probe when the proposed flow depends on perfect behavior.
• Use role inversion when the current solution optimizes for only one actor.
• Use the decision question when the discussion is spreading.

Expected Output

• key assumption under pressure
• main failure mode
• critical question still open

Verification

• The provocation targets a real assumption.
• The challenge remains grounded in the actual user problem.
• The output sharpens the decision instead of derailing it.

Handoff Signals

• The next move is research or strategic review rather than UI execution.
• The critique exposes a cross-functional trade-off.

Pairs Well With

• ux-strategy
• triad-check

Anti-patterns

• Arguing against everything equally.
• Using provocation to avoid taking responsibility for a recommendation.
• Confusing hostility with rigor.