Make an idea lookable and clickable at the cheapest fidelity that answers its one open question — an ASCII sketch, an SVG click-dummy with hotspots linking screens, or a self-contained HTML file. Use when the user wants to see or try an idea before committing to structure, tokens, or copy. Triggers on prototype, wireframe, mockup, click-dummy, sketch the screens, "what would this look like", "mock this up", "show me the flow", "прототип", "макет".
Scanned 9/3/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add glebis/humane-agentic-design --skill prototype --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Prototype?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/glebis-prototype)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: prototype
description: Make an idea lookable and clickable at the cheapest fidelity that answers its one open question — an ASCII sketch, an SVG click-dummy with hotspots linking screens, or a self-contained HTML file. Use when the user wants to see or try an idea before committing to structure, tokens, or copy. Triggers on prototype, wireframe, mockup, click-dummy, sketch the screens, "what would this look like", "mock this up", "show me the flow", "прототип", "макет".
handoffs:
- to: design-frameworks
when: the structure has survived and must be fitted to an existing design system or component toolchain
- to: design-tokens
when: the structure has survived a look or a click-through and needs a system to render under
- to: respondent-panel
when: the prototype needs gut reactions from strangers, not from its maker
- to: walkthrough
when: a job from the corpus needs attempting on the click-dummy
- to: ux-writing
when: drafted prototype strings are about to outlive the prototype
accepts:
- from: jtbd
---
# Prototype
**Announce at start:** "I'm using the humane:prototype skill to make this idea lookable and clickable at the cheapest fidelity that answers the question."
A prototype exists to answer exactly one open question — is this the right
structure, does the navigation make sense, does the screen read at a glance —
before anything expensive is committed. This skill produces the cheapest
artifact that answers that question and stops.
## Quick Reference
| Need | Where |
| --- | --- |
| Format contracts per rung: file layout, hotspot markup, self-containment, the SVG text traps | `references/formats.md` |
| Where the output file goes | `setup/references/paths.md` — `setup` owns the path table |
| The editable design-file exit: availability, style archetypes, the active-document pre-flight | `references/design-file.md` |
## The one question
Every prototype names, before anything is drawn, the single question it will
answer. A broad request ("mock up the app") contains several candidate
questions — extract them, and ask the user to pick one; a prototype chasing two
questions answers neither. Record the chosen question in the artifact's notes
block (see Output).
The question is **settled** only by the user saying so, or by a named
reviewer's output — a `respondent-panel` read, a `walkthrough` result. The
maker's own impression that a structure "looks right" settles nothing; this
skill never reviews its own output, and it does not certify its own handoffs
either. Until the question is settled, it stays open, and escalation waits.
## Where it sits
The home case is greenfield: after `jtbd`, before `design-tokens`. The corpus
says what job the interface serves; the prototype proposes a structure for it;
only a structure that survives being looked at or clicked through deserves a
token set.
`jtbd` is preferred, not required. Entered directly, with no corpus: offer to
run `jtbd` first, and if the user declines, proceed — with "no corpus;
structure is a guess" stated in the artifact's notes block.
Prototyping inside an existing system is also legitimate — a new screen for a
product that already has tokens. The existing tokens are then context, and the
token-faithful tier renders under them. What this skill still never does there
is re-litigate the system: a finding about the tokens themselves belongs to
`design-tokens`, and defects in the eventual real build to `layout-rules`.
## The fidelity ladder
Three formats, in escalation order. Name the open question first, then pick the
lowest rung that can answer it. The user's explicit format request always wins.
| Rung | Format | Answers | Never claims |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | **ASCII** — box-drawing sketch in a fenced code block | Is this the right structure? What goes where? | Proportion, color, feel |
| 2 | **SVG click-dummy** — screens as SVG frames, hotspots linking them, in one self-contained HTML file | Does the navigation make sense? Can you get from A to B? | Visual polish, real rendering behavior |
| 3 | **HTML** — real markup and CSS, self-contained file | Does the screen read? Do the interactions feel right? | That it is the product |
Escalate only when the current rung's question is settled (see "The one
question" — settled by the user or a named reviewer, never by the maker) or
when the open question lives on a higher rung. Do not skip rung 1 for a new structure — an
ASCII sketch that is wrong costs one message to redraw; an HTML page that is
wrong costs an argument.
**HTML fidelity is the user's choice.** Before building rung 3, ask which tier:
- **Wireframe** — grayscale, system font, real copy, no brand. Default when no
token set exists (the normal case at this point in the cycle).
- **Token-faithful** — reads the project's compiled `design-tokens` CSS if one
exists and renders under it. Offer this only when the tokens exist; never
invent a palette to fake it — inventing one is `brandkit`'s job.
Format contracts — file layout, hotspot markup, the self-containment rules —
live in `references/formats.md`. Read it before producing rung 2 or 3.
## The editable exit: a design file
When the host exposes a design-file backend, a prototype can be produced as an
editable design file (`.pen`) instead of a rung-3 HTML page. **This is not
rung 4** — the ladder produces disposable artifacts that answer one question; a
design file is a living document someone keeps editing. Take this exit when the
user wants to *carry on designing*, not when they want an answer to a question.
The `design_tool` setting (`setup`) gates it: `auto` uses a backend when the
host exposes one, `none` pins it off. Say which of the two artifact kinds you
produced — "here is your prototype" means different things for a file that
opens and a file that needs an app.
The full contract — availability and the doctor caveat, why style archetypes
are scaffolding and not brand decisions, and the mandatory active-document
pre-flight before any build (the backend writes into whatever document is open)
— lives in `references/design-file.md`. Read it before taking this exit.
## Copy in a prototype
The prototype drafts its own strings freely — buttons need words before
`ux-writing` has run, and lorem ipsum hides layout truths. Ground the wording
in the JTBD corpus where it exists. But drafted copy is scaffolding: if any
prototype string is about to be reused in the real product, hand it to
`ux-writing` — that skill owns the source wording of every user-facing string,
and prototype copy that skips the handoff ships unreviewed.
## Output
Every **ladder** prototype is a file the user can open, not a paste into chat
(rung 1 may also be shown inline). It is **self-contained**: no CDN, no
external fonts, no build step. Double-click opens it. The design-file exit is
the stated exception — `references/design-file.md` owns its output rules.
The destination is `setup`'s rule, not this skill's: resolve
`artifact_path(name, "prototype", "html")` — it returns the complete file path
(`.design/prototype-<name>.html` beside the project) — and never write to the
working directory. The full path table, defaults, and prohibitions live in
`setup/references/paths.md`. If the user names a place, use it.
> **Claude Code extras:** offer to publish the file as an Artifact when the
> user wants a shareable link; the file on disk remains the source of truth.
Every prototype carries a **notes block inside the file itself** — a visible
footer (rung 1: a paragraph under the sketch) — so the context travels with
the artifact when it is opened alone. Chat may repeat it; it must never be the
only copy. Three fields:
1. **The question** this prototype answers, in one sentence.
2. **The job** it serves, cited from the corpus (`jtbd.json` outcome or force)
— or "no corpus; structure is a guess" when `jtbd` has not run.
3. **What is fake** — drafted copy, invented data, dead controls — so a
reviewer does not report scaffolding as findings.
## Smoke test before handoff
Producing the file includes proving it meets its own format contract. This is
production QA, not review — reviewing the design stays with `respondent-panel`,
`walkthrough`, and the rest. Before handing the artifact over:
- open the file with no hash and confirm the first screen shows;
- follow every hotspot and every back link once;
- confirm zero external requests (no CDN, fonts, or linked assets);
- check every string against its container (the SVG text traps in
`references/formats.md`).
Anything on this list that cannot be run is reported as **Not verified**, never
silently assumed.
## What this skill does not own
| Concern | Owner |
| --- | --- |
| Whether the structure serves a real job | `jtbd` — cite it, don't re-derive it |
| The token set, colors, and contrast measurement | `design-tokens` |
| Typeface selection | `type-specimen` |
| Final wording of any string that outlives the prototype | `ux-writing` |
| Structural defect classes in the eventual real build | `layout-rules` |
| How the prototype lands with strangers | `respondent-panel` |
| Whether a person can complete a task on it | `walkthrough` |
| Fitting the settled structure to an existing design system | `design-frameworks` |
A prototype is never reviewed by this skill. It is handed to the reviewers as a
first-class artifact and judged there, once, by the skill that owns each rule.
## Conflict precedence
The user's explicit words > this ruleset > the project's existing system >
personal taste. If the project already has screens the prototype contradicts,
flag the conflict; don't silently redesign the product.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!