Laws of UX

Activation rules

Critique workflow

1. Identify the artifact type, user goal, task stage, and likely user context. State assumptions if the prompt does not provide them.
2. Select exactly 2-4 relevant laws. Prefer fewer, sharper lenses over a broad checklist. Do not force a law that does not reveal a concrete issue or opportunity.
3. If selection is uncertain, read

   references/selection-guide.md

   first. Otherwise read only the selected law reference files from the branch map below.
4. For each selected law, ground the critique in visible or described design details. Tie every recommendation to the law's mechanism.
5. Prioritize fixes by user impact and task centrality. Separate law-grounded critique from unrelated personal taste.
6. Run the output through

   scripts/validate-output.py

   before delivering. The validator checks structure and flags filler phrases. Fix what it flags.

Output format

## Laws of UX critique

**Context read:** [artifact/screen/flow + key assumption]
**Selected lenses:** [2-4 law names]

### 1. [Law name] - [specific issue or opportunity]
- **How it applies here:** [reference exact UI detail, step, copy, control, hierarchy, state, or behavior]
- **Recommendation:** [concrete change]
- **Why this follows from the law:** [mechanism, not generic UX advice]
- **Watch-out:** [tradeoff, risk, or what not to overcorrect]

### 2. ...

## Prioritized next moves
1. [highest-impact change]
2. [next change]
3. [optional validation/research question]

Branch map

references/

aesthetic-usability-effect.md

choice-overload.md

chunking.md

cognitive-bias.md

cognitive-load.md

doherty-threshold.md

fittss-law.md

flow.md

goal-gradient-effect.md

hicks-law.md

jakobs-law.md

law-of-common-region.md

law-of-proximity.md

law-of-pragnanz.md

law-of-similarity.md

law-of-uniform-connectedness.md

mental-model.md

millers-law.md

occams-razor.md

paradox-of-the-active-user.md

pareto-principle.md

parkinsons-law.md

peak-end-rule.md

postels-law.md

selective-attention.md

serial-position-effect.md

teslers-law.md

von-restorff-effect.md

working-memory.md

zeigarnik-effect.md

Gotchas

• Do not shotgun all laws. The user asked for critique, so return the 2-4 laws that change the recommendation.
• Do not output encyclopedia entries. A law earns space only when it explains something specific in the design.
• Do not treat visual beauty, fewer clicks, or fewer options as automatically better. Tie the claim to user goal, context, and the law's tradeoff.
• If two selected laws produce overlapping recommendations, drop the weaker one and use the freed slot for a different lens or a sharper version of the surviving law. Two laws saying the same thing wastes a slot.
• Do not turn WCAG into Laws of UX. Accessibility can intersect with the critique, but a WCAG audit belongs to a different framework.
• Do not turn brand critique into UX critique unless the brand choice changes comprehension, task completion, salience, trust, or interaction behavior.
• Treat the live lawsofux.com list (30 entries) as source of truth, not the legacy 21 from the print book.