review-animations
Audit an existing interface's animation purpose, timing, interruption, accessibility, and rendering. Invoke explicitly with a component, page, or recording.
SKILL.mdskills/review-animations/SKILL.md
GitHubReview animations
Run this workflow when the user explicitly requests an animation audit. Loading another design skill does not start this audit. Treat the review as read-only unless the user also authorizes repairs.
- Identify the target and requested behavior from the active task.
- Read project motion tokens, component primitives, relevant code, and dependencies.
- Observe the actual interaction in the browser or the supplied recording when available.
- Review the points below against the product's purpose and project conventions.
- Return actionable findings ordered by user impact, with file locations and verification evidence.
Review points
- Purpose: Does motion explain state, acknowledge input, or preserve spatial continuity?
- Frequency: Do repeated actions remain fast and usable?
- Timing: Do duration and easing fit the distance, scale, and existing motion language?
- Continuity: Do origin, enter and exit direction, and overlapping states make sense?
- Interruption: Do reversal, repeated activation, and cancellation preserve the right state?
- Gestures: Are capture, momentum, boundaries, and alternate inputs handled?
- Accessibility: Do keyboard, focus, touch, and reduced-motion behavior remain usable?
- Rendering: Is there observed jank, excessive layout or paint, or unnecessary main-thread work?
Use project-specific values. Evaluate spring and easing choices in the actual interaction. Verify library and browser behavior before claiming hardware acceleration or a performance regression. When only code is available, identify runtime questions that need browser checks. For implementation patterns, discover and load emil-design-eng as needed.
Findings
For each issue, give location, observed behavior, user impact, and the smallest useful correction. Use a Before / After / Why table when several concrete changes benefit from comparison. Separate observed defects from code-based questions that need runtime confirmation. If repair is authorized, apply the corrections and repeat the affected interactions.