UX strategy

Compare plausible UX directions, surface trade-offs, and take a position when the interaction approach is still open.

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 when the real problem is choosing a direction, not polishing an already-set interface.

When to Use

• new flows
• major interaction choices
• ambiguous UX direction

When NOT to Use

• local visual polish
• auditing a screen that already exists

Core Moves

1. Reframe the problem.
2. Map 2–3 plausible directions.
3. Name gains, costs, and success conditions.
4. Take a position with a visible trade-off.

Optional Modules

• Constraint lens — Bring in business, technical, or operational constraints when the direction cannot be judged on UX alone.
• Counter-argument — Capture the strongest reason your recommendation could be wrong.
• Experiment lens — Translate the strategic choice into a next validation step.

Activation Triggers

• Use the constraint lens when other functions can block the direction.
• Use counter-argument when the team is converging too quickly.
• Use experiment lens when you need evidence before committing.

Expected Output

• better-framed problem
• compared directions
• recommended path

Verification

• At least two real alternatives were considered.
• The trade-off is explicit.
• The recommendation is actionable, not vague preference.

Handoff Signals

• The next step is visual design or UX writing work.
• The choice affects product or technical planning beyond design.

Pairs Well With

• heuristic-audit
• triad-check
• feature-planning

Anti-patterns

• Calling a preference a strategy.
• Comparing a real option with a strawman.
• Ending with “it depends” when a decision is possible.