refero-design by referodesign/refero_skill
npx skills add https://github.com/referodesign/refero_skill --skill refero-design不要猜测——要了解。研究真实产品,向最佳实践学习,然后自信地设计。
但请记住: 参考资料只是原料。你的产品需要自己的风味。使用 Refero 打下坚实的基础(80%),然后注入灵魂(20%)——那些让你的设计令人难忘的独特选择。
心态: 研究不是复制平均水平。而是发现前 10% 的产品做了什么而其他产品没做。通用的发现(“提供折扣”、“展示社会认同”)只是入场券——要寻找具有确切文案、确切数字、确切条件的特定策略。通用的设计复制模式。伟大的设计理解心理学。
始终要问:“如果我明天把这个展示给 10 个用户,他们会记住什么?”
切勿盲目设计。 首先问这些问题:
1. 我们要构建什么?
→ 屏幕类型、平台、范围
2. 这是为谁设计的?
→ 受众、技术水平
3. 用户应该完成什么?
→ 主要操作、成功指标
4. 它应该唤起什么感觉?
→ 基调、能量
5. 用户“雇佣”这个页面来完成什么工作?
→ “帮我做决定”(定价、比较)
→ “说服我信任你”(金融科技、医疗保健、企业级)
→ “让我无摩擦地开始”(入门引导、注册)
→ “告诉我下一步该做什么”(空状态、仪表板)
→ “让我感觉不会错过”(等待列表、升级)
6. 他们可能有什么异议?
→ “它值这个价吗?” / “它是合法的吗?” / “它适合我吗?”
7. 他们明天应该记住什么?
→ 钩子、差异化点、“顿悟”时刻
8. 有什么限制条件吗?
→ 品牌指南、技术要求、灵感来源
输出一份设计简报:
“我正在为 [WHO] 设计一个 [WHAT],帮助他们 [GOAL],并且应该让人感觉 [TONE]。用户的工作是:[JOB]。需要克服的主要异议是:[OBJECTION]。他们应该记住:。限制条件:。”
广告位招租
在这里展示您的产品或服务
触达数万 AI 开发者,精准高效
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 0. 探索 → 设计简报 │
│ ↓ │
│ 1. 研究 │
│ 尝试查询:宽泛 → 具体 → 行业领先者 │
│ 尝试不同角度,直到模式浮现 │
│ → 原始材料:数十个参考资料 │
│ ↓ │
│ 2. 分析 │
│ 提取并结构化你的发现 │
│ 比较方法,识别模式 │
│ → 综合:记录的模式 + 决策 │
│ ↓ │
│ 3. 设计 │
│ 应用工艺:排版、色彩、间距、文案 │
│ 定义灵魂:是什么让这个产品与众不同 │
│ → 蓝图:设计系统 + 独特身份 │
│ ↓ │
│ 4. 实现 │
│ 构建实际的界面 │
│ 对照参考资料和质量标准进行验证 │
│ → 可交付的设计 │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
目标: 收集原始材料。自由尝试不同的搜索策略。
查询屏幕上实际存在的内容——而非抽象概念:
注意: 行业信息位于
category字段,而非屏幕描述中。搜索“onboarding” → 按相关类别筛选结果。
定价页面的查询示例:
Screen type: "pricing", "pricing page", "plans"
Elements: "pricing toggle", "annual/monthly switch", "plan cards"
Companies: "Linear", "Superhuman", "Loom", "Notion"
Styles: "dark mode pricing", "minimalist pricing"
Platforms: "ios pricing", "web pricing", "mobile subscription"
不要满足于第一个查询。尝试多种角度,直到你了解全局。
查询类型:
| 类型 | 示例 | 目的 |
|---|---|---|
| 宽泛 | "[screen type]" | 了解整体概况 |
| 行业 | "[industry] + [screen type]" | 行业特定模式 |
| 风格 | "minimalist", "dark", "playful" + [type] | 视觉方向 |
| 具体 | "[exact UI element or interaction]" | 确切的 UI 模式 |
| 领先者 | 以出色设计闻名的公司名称 | 最佳实践示例 |
| 组件 | "[specific element]: toggle, card, table, modal" | 单个元素 |
| 相邻领域 | 不同行业中的类似问题 | 新鲜、意想不到的模式 |
| 情感 | "trustworthy", "premium", "friendly" + [type] | 基于感觉的搜索 |
搜索循环:
1. 从 BROAD 开始 → 看看存在什么
2. 注意到有趣的模式 → 转向 SPECIFIC
3. 找到一个好例子 → 搜索那个 COMPANY
4. 尝试不同的 ELEMENT → "plan comparison", "feature table"
5. 跨平台查看 → 为 iOS 设计?也看看 web 版本(获取新想法)
6. 按 CATEGORY 筛选 → 缩小到你的行业
7. 重复直到看过 50-100 个结果
示例: 设计一个定价页面
"pricing page" (宽泛) → 看到切换模式
→ "pricing toggle annual monthly" (具体元素)
→ "Linear" (好例子) → 探索他们的方法
→ "plan comparison", "feature table" (不同元素)
→ 同时检查 web 和移动版本
→ 按 SaaS 类别筛选
→ 50+ 个结果,对模式有了清晰的认识
深入,而非仅仅广泛:
不要停留在第一页。最好的灵感隐藏在显而易见的结果之外:
黄金藏在长尾里。 前 10 个结果 = 每个人都能看到的。第 50-100 个结果 = 独特的灵感。
| 情况 | 工具 |
|---|---|
| 刚开始 —— 需要最佳实践 | get_design_guidance |
| 独立屏幕(404、错误页、启动页) | search_screens |
| 流程中的屏幕 | search_screens + search_flows |
| 理解完整流程 | search_flows → 然后 get_flow |
| 特定屏幕的详细信息 | get_screen |
| 类似方法 | get_screen + include_similar: true |
| 需要查看 UI | image_size: "thumbnail" 或 "full" |
决策树:
Journey (multi-step)? → FLOWS first, then screens for details
Single screen? → SCREENS only
Few flow results? → Search screens and reconstruct the journey
关键问题: “这个屏幕有‘之前’和‘之后’吗?”
使用 limit 参数。 每次查询获取更多上下文——不要犹豫,设置 limit=25 甚至 50。
搜索结果只包含简要描述。你必须为 5-10 个最佳结果调用 get_screen 以获取完整分析:
include_similar: true —— 返回视觉上相似的屏幕。找到一个好例子?相似的屏幕 = 快速获得更多好例子。image_size:使用 "none"(默认)进行文本分析,使用 "thumbnail" 或 "full" 获取视觉灵感。💡 批处理技巧: 一次调用 2-3 个屏幕,而不是全部调用。如果某个失败——尝试更小的批次,不要停止。
❌ 只阅读搜索描述 = 表面研究
✅ 为最佳发现调用 get_screen = 真正的研究
示例工作流程:
1. search_screens("pricing page", limit=30) → 扫描结果
2. 挑选 8 个最有趣的屏幕
3. get_screen(screen_1, include_similar=true) → 深度分析
4. get_screen(screen_2, screen_3) → 比较方法
5. 对剩余屏幕重复此过程
每个任务都有两个维度:你正在解决的挑战和所需的研究类型。在搜索之前识别两者。
| 如果挑战是... | 聚焦研究于... |
|---|---|
| 建立信任(金融科技、医疗保健、企业级) | 安全信号、资质证明、具体性、社会认同 |
| 减少摩擦(入门引导、注册、结账) | 渐进式披露、智能默认值、内联验证 |
| 制造紧迫感(等待列表、限时优惠) | 稀缺性提示、排他性、不令人反感的 FOMO |
| 化负面为正面(空状态、付费墙、错误) | 动机、清晰的下一步行动、机会框架 |
| 简化复杂性(复杂定价、设置) | 信息层次结构、渐进式揭示、比较 |
| 脱颖而出(竞争激烈的市场) | 大胆的视觉选择、独特的语调、令人难忘的细节 |
提问: “这里最可能出错的 #1 件事是什么?” 然后研究其他人是如何解决的。
视觉方向 —— 寻找合适的风格
Look for: typography (fonts, sizes, weights), colors, spacing, details (shadows, radii, gradients)
Queries: "dark mode", "minimalist dashboard", "gradient hero", "glassmorphism"
Extract: font pairings, color palettes, spacing rhythm, micro-details
Skip: conversion tactics, copy analysis
竞品分析 —— 了解他人如何定位
Look for: headlines, value propositions, pricing structure, feature framing
Queries: "[competitor name]", "saas landing", "pricing page", "hero section"
Extract: how they explain value, what objections they address, pricing tiers
Skip: visual details (unless relevant to positioning)
用户体验/流程优化 —— 改进用户旅程
Look for: step count, friction points, error handling, save states
Queries: "onboarding flow", "checkout", "signup", "cancellation"
Extract: what reduces friction, decision points, recovery patterns
Skip: visual polish (focus on structure)
组件设计 —— 特定的 UI 元素
Look for: all states (default, hover, active, disabled, loading, error, empty)
Queries: "toggle", "dropdown", "modal", "card", "table"
Extract: interaction patterns, edge cases, accessibility considerations
Skip: page-level patterns
根据需要混合使用:
有关详细工具参数,请参阅 references/mcp-tools.md。
视角 A:结构 —— 它们都做了什么?
视角 B:视觉工艺 —— 它看起来和感觉如何?对于每个强有力的参考,注意:
不要复制——提取原则。“这感觉高级是因为紧密的字间距和充足的留白” → 将此原则应用到你的设计中。
视角 C:转化与灵魂 —— 是什么让这个设计有效?对于每个强有力的参考,问:
对于流程(额外视角):
当你能对所有问题回答“是”时,研究就完成了:
get_screen(深度分析)常见错误:
get_screen好的研究与坏的研究:
❌ 表面研究:
- 3 个查询,都是“pricing page”的变体
- 阅读了 15 个搜索描述
- 跳过了 get_screen 调用
- 发现:“提供折扣”、“展示价值”、“收集反馈”(通用)
✅ 真正的研究:
- 7+ 个不同角度的查询
- 在搜索结果中查看了 50+ 个屏幕
- 为 8 个最佳发现调用了 get_screen
- 具有 EXACT 细节的发现:“Copy.ai 仅在用户选择‘太贵’原因后显示 60% 折扣,使用确切文案‘我们不想因为价格失去你’和 24 小时倒计时”
- 能够解释每个模式背后的“原因”
50-100 个参考资料的原始集合。先不要筛选——收集所有可能有用的东西。
完成研究后,始终向用户呈现摘要:
📊 研究摘要
────────────────────────────────────────
查询次数:[count] | 分析的屏幕数:[count]
我的发现:
[根据用户的问题进行调整——视觉细节、流程逻辑、模式等]
关键发现(附来源的事实):
• [Company] — [specific detail: exact copy, size, color, step count, etc.]
• [Company] — [specific detail]
显著差异:
• [产品之间的差异——如果与任务相关]
缺失:[未找到的内容]
────────────────────────────────────────
质量检查: 每个发现都应该是你观察到的事实,而不是意见。包含来源(公司/产品名称)。要具体——“20px 字体”而不是“大字体”,“5 步流程”而不是“短流程”。
目标: 结构化你的研究。提取模式。做出决策。
这个阶段是纯粹的综合——没有意见,只是记录你的发现。
不要只是遵循“最佳实践”。 研究是关于理解选择为什么有效,而不是复制每个人做了什么。
实验心态:
分析时,问:
对于每个强有力的参考,记录:
| 类别 | 需要注意什么 |
|---|---|
| 布局 | 网格、最大宽度、间距节奏、视觉层次 |
| 排版 | 字体、字号比例、字重、特殊处理 |
| 色彩 | 背景、强调色、文本层次、语义颜色 |
| 组件 | 卡片、按钮、导航、交互元素 |
| 文案 | 标题风格、行动号召语言、语调 |
比较 3-5 个最佳参考:
| 方面 | 参考 A | 参考 B | 参考 C | 模式 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 背景 | 白色 | 米色 | 灰色 | 暖中性色 |
| 卡片 | 带边框 | 彩色 | 带阴影 | 颜色区分 |
| 切换 | 胶囊 | 开关 | 标签页 | 胶囊常见 |
| 行动号召样式 | 主要 | 次要 | 幽灵 | 按层级变化 |
不要只记录模式——捕获要借鉴的特定策略:
| 来源 | 是什么 | 为什么有效 | 我将如何使用它 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Linear | 行动号召下方的“无需信用卡” | 在决策点消除异议 | 相同位置 |
| Stripe | 投资回报率计算器 | 让价值变得具体可感 | 适配我们的指标 |
| Notion | 真实用户头像,非库存图片 | 创造真实性 | 使用真实推荐 |
| Clearful | “点击 2 次即可开始” | 减少感知到的努力 | 用在行动号召区域 |
| Brilliant | 显示试用期的时间线 | 让过程变得具体可感 | 视觉化试用说明 |
停止: 如果这个表格少于 5 行,请返回研究阶段。
要具体,不要模糊:
涵盖的类别(选择相关的):
结构化文档,包含:
目标: 达到专业水准。这是工艺至关重要的地方。
你已从研究中获得了结构。现在像高级产品设计师一样执行。
比例: 使用比例(1.2 或 1.25)。最多 6-8 种尺寸:展示(48-64px)、H1(36-48px)、H2(24-32px)、正文(16-18px)、小号(13-14px)、说明文字(11-12px)。
行高: 较大的文本 = 更紧凑(1.0-1.2)。正文 = 更宽松(1.5-1.6)。
⚠️ 字间距 —— 切勿跳过
| 文本类型 | 字间距 |
|---|---|
| 正文(14-18px) | 0 |
| 小号文本(11-13px) | 0.01-0.02em —— 必需 |
| UI 标签/按钮 | 0.02em —— 必需 |
| 全大写 | 0.06-0.1em —— 始终必需 |
| 大标题(32px+) | -0.01 到 -0.02em(收紧) |
| 展示文字(48px+) | -0.02 到 -0.03em(更收紧) |
常见错误:
行长: 50-75 个字符(max-width: 65ch)。字体配对: 最多 2 种字体。
→ 完整指南:references/typography.md
调色板: 4 层 —— 中性色(70-90%)、主强调色(5-10%)、语义色(成功/警告/危险)、效果色(很少使用)。
中性色: 10-12 个阶梯(50…950)。用间距创造呼吸感,而不是用褪色的文本。
主色: 一种品牌色及其阶梯(50–950)。默认使用 600,悬停使用 700,激活状态使用 800,100-200 用于浅色调。
对比度: 正文文本(≤16px)为 4.5:1,大文本为 3:1。
深色主题: 不是简单的反转。使用独立的中性色。背景 #0f0f0f,而不是 #000。文本 #f0f0f0,而不是 #fff。
设计令牌: 按用途命名(--primary),而不是按颜色(--blue)。
→ 完整指南:references/color.md
基础单位: 4px 或 8px。所有间距都由此倍数构成。
4px 系统: 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 48, 64, 96
8px 系统: 8, 16, 24, 32, 48, 64, 96, 128
接近度 = 关系。 越近 = 关联越强,越远 = 越分离。间距解释了分组。
节奏: 相似元素之间一致的间隔。更大的间隔 = 新的区块。
⛔ 不要使用靛蓝/紫罗兰色 —— 除非用户明确要求紫色/靛蓝色,否则不要使用它。每个 LLM 都默认使用靛蓝色(#6366f1),因为它是“安全的”。这使它成为 AI 生成设计的最大特征。从你的研究中选择适合品牌的颜色。
通用的 AI 输出:
专业的设计:
通用结构陷阱: 不要默认使用:英雄区 → 功能网格 → 定价 → 常见问题 → 行动号召 这是每个人都使用的“安全”模板。问:“我可以添加、删除或重新排序什么,以使这个模板对这个产品更有效?”
→ 完整指南:references/anti-ai-slop.md
动效服务于:反馈(操作成功)、连续性(它去了哪里)、层次结构(看这里)。如果动画不服务于其中之一——就移除它。
| 类别 | 时长 | 示例 |
|---|---|---|
| 即时 | 90–150ms | 悬停、按下、切换 |
| 状态变化 | 160–240ms | 手风琴、标签页 |
| 大型过渡 | 240–360ms | 模态框、抽屉 |
缓动函数: 进入 = ease-out,退出 = ease-in,变化 = ease-in-out。
微交互: 按钮按下 scale: 0.98 90ms。悬停背景变化 120ms。
必需: 支持 prefers-reduced-motion。产品 UI 中不要有超过 500ms 的动画。
反模式: ❌ 悬停超过 300ms ❌ 线性缓动 ❌ 所有东西同时动画
→ 完整指南:references/motion.md
图标是排版,不是插图。是标点符号,不是迷你图片。
风格: 每个产品使用一种风格(描边或填充)。混合库 = 视觉拼贴。
光学矫正: 几何中心 ≠ 视觉中心。箭头、V 形需要 0.5–1px 的偏移。
尺寸: 匹配文本的视觉重量。图标高度 ≈ 文本行高或更小。
颜色: currentColor 自动继承。仅状态图标使用语义颜色。
可访问性: 操作图标需要 aria-label。点击区域至少 44×44px。
图标库: Lucide(SaaS 默认)、Heroicons(Tailwind)、Material Symbols、SF Symbols(Apple)。
→ 完整指南:references/icons.md
停止: 在编写任何代码之前填写此表格。
| 元素 | 你的答案 | 实现 |
|---|---|---|
| 钩子(前 3 秒) | _______________ | 主标题 + 视觉 |
| 故事弧线 | 问题 → 解决方案 → 证明 → 行动 | 区块顺序 |
| 异议消除器 | 1. _____ 2. _____ 3. _____ | 具体位置 |
| 信任信号 | [ ] 社会认同 [ ] 保证 [ ] 安全 [ ] 具体细节 | 哪些以及在哪里 |
| 紧迫感/稀缺性 | _____ 或“不适用 —— 解释原因” | 如果适用 |
| 令人难忘的点 | _____ | 他们会截图什么? |
必需的信任信号(至少选择 2 个):
如果你无法填写此表格,你设计的只是装饰,而非说服。
~80% 经过验证的模式 + ~20% 独特的选择。
在哪里添加独特性:
测试: “如果有人截图这个,他们会知道它来自这个产品吗?”
完整的设计规范:
目标: 构建它。对照参考资料和质量标准进行验证。
→ 关于实现细节(表单、焦点、图像、触摸、性能):references/craft-details.md
| 类别 | 检查 |
|---|---|
| 功能性 | 主要操作明显吗?错误状态?在移动设备上工作吗? |
| 视觉性 | 眯眼测试通过吗?间距节奏?排版有意图吗?细节打磨了吗? |
| 说服性 | 3 秒内有钩子吗?2+ 个信任信号?异议解决了吗?微文案有个性吗? |
| 完成度 | 没有孤行单词?图标对齐了吗?按钮一致吗?有令人难忘的点吗? |
将你的实现与排名前 3 的参考资料放在一起。
目标:在 3/4 的标准上匹配或超越:
有关完整演练(SaaS 减少流失),请参阅 references/example-workflow.md。
| 指南 | 内容 |
|---|---|
| typography.md | 比例、配对、字重、行高、字间距、响应式排版 |
| color.md | 调色板结构、中性色、主色/语义色、深色主题、设计令牌 |
| motion.md | 微交互、时长、缓动函数、减少动效、动画令牌 |
| icons.md | 网格系统、光学矫正、可访问性、图标+文本配对 |
| craft-details.md | 焦点状态、表单、图像、触摸、性能、可访问性 |
| anti-ai-slop.md | 是什么让设计看起来通用以及如何避免 |
| mcp-tools.md | Refero 工具的详细参数和用法 |
| example-workflow.md | 完整演练示例 |
不要猜测。用 Refero 进行研究。有意图地设计。注入灵魂。
每周安装量
724
仓库
GitHub 星标数
14
首次出现
2026 年 2 月 28 日
安全审计
安装于
codex716
cursor715
cline713
gemini-cli713
opencode713
github-copilot713
Don't guess—know. Study real products, learn from the best, then design with confidence.
But remember: References are just ingredients. Your product needs its own flavor. Use Refero for a rock-solid foundation (80%), then breathe soul into it (20%)—the distinctive choices that make your design memorable.
Mindset: Research isn't copying the average. It's finding what the TOP 10% do that others don't. Generic findings ("offer discount", "show social proof") are table stakes—hunt for specific tactics with exact copy, exact numbers, exact conditions. Generic design copies patterns. Great design understands psychology.
Always ask: "If I showed this to 10 users tomorrow, what would they remember?"
Never design blind. Ask these questions first:
1. WHAT are we building?
→ Screen type, Platform, Scope
2. WHO is this for?
→ Audience, Technical level
3. WHAT should users accomplish?
→ Primary action, Success metric
4. WHAT feeling should it evoke?
→ Tone, Energy
5. WHAT JOB is the user hiring this page to do?
→ "Help me decide" (pricing, comparison)
→ "Convince me to trust you" (fintech, healthcare, enterprise)
→ "Get me started without friction" (onboarding, signup)
→ "Show me what to do next" (empty state, dashboard)
→ "Make me feel I'm not missing out" (waitlist, upgrade)
6. WHAT objections might they have?
→ "Is it worth the price?" / "Is it legit?" / "Will it work for me?"
7. WHAT should they remember tomorrow?
→ The hook, the differentiator, the "aha"
8. ANY constraints?
→ Brand guidelines, Technical requirements, Inspirations
Output a Design Brief:
"I'm designing a [WHAT] for [WHO] that helps them [GOAL] and should feel [TONE]. The user's job: [JOB]. Main objection to overcome: [OBJECTION]. They should remember: [HOOK]. Constraints: [CONSTRAINTS]."
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 0. DISCOVER → Design Brief │
│ ↓ │
│ 1. RESEARCH │
│ Experiment with queries: broad → narrow → leader │
│ Try different angles until patterns emerge │
│ → Raw material: dozens of references │
│ ↓ │
│ 2. ANALYZE │
│ Extract and structure what you found │
│ Compare approaches, identify patterns │
│ → Synthesis: documented patterns + decisions │
│ ↓ │
│ 3. DESIGN │
│ Apply craft: typography, color, spacing, copy │
│ Define soul: what makes THIS product unique │
│ → Blueprint: design system + unique identity │
│ ↓ │
│ 4. IMPLEMENT │
│ Build the actual interface │
│ Validate against references and quality gates │
│ → Ship-ready design │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Goal: Gather raw material. Experiment freely with different search strategies.
Query what's literally on the screen—not abstract concepts:
Note: Industry info lives in the
categoryfield, not screen descriptions. Search "onboarding" → filter results by relevant category.
Example queries for a pricing page:
Screen type: "pricing", "pricing page", "plans"
Elements: "pricing toggle", "annual/monthly switch", "plan cards"
Companies: "Linear", "Superhuman", "Loom", "Notion"
Styles: "dark mode pricing", "minimalist pricing"
Platforms: "ios pricing", "web pricing", "mobile subscription"
Don't settle on the first query. Try multiple angles until you've seen the landscape.
Query Types:
| Type | Example | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Broad | "[screen type]" | See overall landscape |
| Industry | "[industry] + [screen type]" | Industry-specific patterns |
| Style | "minimalist", "dark", "playful" + [type] | Visual direction |
| Specific | "[exact UI element or interaction]" | Exact UI patterns |
| Leader | Company names known for great design | Best-in-class examples |
| Component | "[specific element]: toggle, card, table, modal" | Individual elements |
| Adjacent | Similar problem in different industry | Fresh unexpected patterns |
Search Loop:
1. Start BROAD → see what exists
2. Notice interesting patterns → go SPECIFIC
3. Find a great example → search that COMPANY
4. Try different ELEMENT → "plan comparison", "feature table"
5. Go CROSS-PLATFORM → designing for iOS? check web too (fresh ideas)
6. Filter by CATEGORY → narrow to your industry
7. Repeat until you've seen 50-100 results
Example: Designing a pricing page
"pricing page" (broad) → see toggle patterns
→ "pricing toggle annual monthly" (specific element)
→ "Linear" (great example) → explore their approach
→ "plan comparison", "feature table" (different elements)
→ check both web and mobile versions
→ filter by SaaS category
→ 50+ results, clear picture of patterns
Go Deep, Not Just Wide:
Don't stop at page 1. The best inspiration hides beyond obvious results:
The gold is in the long tail. First 10 results = what everyone sees. Results 50-100 = unique inspiration.
| Situation | Tool |
|---|---|
| Starting new — need best practices | get_design_guidance |
| Standalone screen (404, error, splash) | search_screens |
| Screen within a journey | search_screens + search_flows |
| Understanding a complete journey | search_flows → then get_flow |
| Details on a specific screen | get_screen |
Decision tree:
Journey (multi-step)? → FLOWS first, then screens for details
Single screen? → SCREENS only
Few flow results? → Search screens and reconstruct the journey
Key Question: "Does this screen have a BEFORE and AFTER?"
Uselimit parameter. Get more context per query—don't hesitate to set limit=25 or even 50.
Search results contain brief descriptions only. You MUST callget_screen for 5-10 best results to get full analysis:
include_similar: true — returns visually similar screens. Found one good example? Similar screens = more good examples fast.image_size: use "none" (default) for text analysis, "thumbnail" or "full" for visual inspiration.💡 Batching tip: Call for 2-3 screens at a time, not all at once. If something fails—try smaller batches, don't stop.
❌ Reading search descriptions only = surface research ✅ Calling get_screen for best finds = real research
Example workflow:
1. search_screens("pricing page", limit=30) → scan results
2. Pick 8 most interesting screens
3. get_screen(screen_1, include_similar=true) → deep analysis
4. get_screen(screen_2, screen_3) → compare approaches
5. Repeat for remaining screens
Every task has two dimensions: the challenge you're solving and the type of research needed. Identify both before searching.
| If the challenge is... | Focus research on... |
|---|---|
| Building trust (fintech, healthcare, enterprise) | Security signals, credentials, specificity, social proof |
| Reducing friction (onboarding, signup, checkout) | Progressive disclosure, smart defaults, inline validation |
| Creating urgency (waitlist, limited offer) | Scarcity cues, exclusivity, FOMO without cringe |
| Turning negative to positive (empty state, paywall, error) | Motivation, clear next action, opportunity framing |
| Simplifying complexity (complex pricing, settings) | Information hierarchy, progressive reveal, comparisons |
| Standing out (crowded market) | Bold visual choices, unique voice, memorable details |
Ask: "What's the #1 thing that could go wrong here?" Then research how others solved it.
Visual direction — finding the right style
Look for: typography (fonts, sizes, weights), colors, spacing, details (shadows, radii, gradients)
Queries: "dark mode", "minimalist dashboard", "gradient hero", "glassmorphism"
Extract: font pairings, color palettes, spacing rhythm, micro-details
Skip: conversion tactics, copy analysis
Competitive analysis — understanding how others position
Look for: headlines, value propositions, pricing structure, feature framing
Queries: "[competitor name]", "saas landing", "pricing page", "hero section"
Extract: how they explain value, what objections they address, pricing tiers
Skip: visual details (unless relevant to positioning)
UX/Flow optimization — improving journeys
Look for: step count, friction points, error handling, save states
Queries: "onboarding flow", "checkout", "signup", "cancellation"
Extract: what reduces friction, decision points, recovery patterns
Skip: visual polish (focus on structure)
Component design — specific UI elements
Look for: all states (default, hover, active, disabled, loading, error, empty)
Queries: "toggle", "dropdown", "modal", "card", "table"
Extract: interaction patterns, edge cases, accessibility considerations
Skip: page-level patterns
Mix as needed:
For detailed tool parameters, see references/mcp-tools.md.
Lens A: Structure — What do they all do?
Lens B: Visual Craft — How does it LOOK and FEEL? For each strong reference, notice:
Don't copy—extract principles. "This feels premium because of tight letter-spacing and generous whitespace" → apply that principle to your design.
Lens C: Conversion & Soul — What makes this one WORK? For each strong reference, ask:
For Flows (additional lens):
Research is done when you can answer YES to all:
get_screen for 5-10 best screens (deep analysis)Common mistakes:
get_screenGood research vs bad research:
❌ Surface research:
- 3 queries, all variations of "pricing page"
- Read 15 search descriptions
- Skipped get_screen calls
- Findings: "offer discount", "show value", "collect feedback" (generic)
✅ Real research:
- 7+ queries across different angles
- Reviewed 50+ screens in search results
- Called get_screen for 8 best finds
- Findings with EXACT details: "Copy.ai shows 60% discount ONLY after 'too expensive' reason, with exact copy 'We'd hate to lose you over price' and 24h countdown"
- Can explain "why" behind each pattern
Raw collection of 50-100 references. Don't filter yet—gather everything potentially useful.
After completing research, ALWAYS present a summary to the user:
📊 RESEARCH SUMMARY
────────────────────────────────────────
Queries: [count] | Screens analyzed: [count]
WHAT I FOUND:
[Adapt to user's question — visual details, flow logic, patterns, etc.]
Key findings (facts with sources):
• [Company] — [specific detail: exact copy, size, color, step count, etc.]
• [Company] — [specific detail]
Notable differences:
• [what varies between products — if relevant to the task]
GAPS: [what wasn't found]
────────────────────────────────────────
Quality check: Every finding should be a fact you observed, not an opinion. Include source (company/product name). Be specific — "20px font" not "large font", "5-step flow" not "short flow".
Goal: Structure your research. Extract patterns. Make decisions.
This phase is pure synthesis—no opinions, just document what you found.
Don't just follow "best practices." Research is about understanding WHY choices work, not copying WHAT everyone does.
The experiment mindset:
When analyzing, ask:
For each strong reference, document:
| Category | What to notice |
|---|---|
| Layout | Grid, max-width, spacing rhythm, visual hierarchy |
| Typography | Fonts, size scale, weights, special treatments |
| Color | Background, accent, text hierarchy, semantic colors |
| Components | Cards, buttons, navigation, interactive elements |
| Copy | Headline style, CTA language, tone |
Compare 3-5 best references:
| Aspect | Ref A | Ref B | Ref C | Pattern |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Background | White | Cream | Gray | Warm neutrals |
| Cards | Bordered | Colored | Shadowed | Color differentiation |
| Toggle | Pills | Switch | Tabs | Pills common |
| CTA style | Primary | Secondary | Ghost | Varies by tier |
Don't just document patterns—capture specific tactics to adapt:
| Source | What | Why It Works | How I'll Use It |
|---|---|---|---|
| Linear | "No credit card" under CTA | Kills objection at decision point | Same placement |
| Stripe | ROI calculator | Makes value tangible | Adapt for our metric |
| Notion | Real user avatars, not stock | Creates authenticity | Use real testimonials |
| Clearful | "2 taps to start" | Reduces perceived effort | Use in CTA area |
| Brilliant | Timeline showing trial | Makes process tangible | Visual trial explainer |
STOP: If this table has fewer than 5 rows, go back to research.
Be specific, not vague:
Categories to cover (pick relevant ones):
Structured document with:
Goal: Achieve professional quality. This is where craft matters.
You have the structure from research. Now execute like a senior product designer.
Scale: Use a ratio (1.2 or 1.25). Max 6-8 sizes: Display (48-64px), H1 (36-48px), H2 (24-32px), Body (16-18px), Small (13-14px), Caption (11-12px).
Leading: Larger text = tighter (1.0-1.2). Body = looser (1.5-1.6).
⚠️ LETTER-SPACING — DO NOT SKIP
| Text Type | Letter-spacing |
|---|---|
| Body (14-18px) | 0 |
| Small text (11-13px) | 0.01-0.02em — required |
| UI labels/buttons | 0.02em — required |
| ALL CAPS | 0.06-0.1em — always required |
| Large headings (32px+) | -0.01 to -0.02em (tighten) |
Common mistakes:
Line length: 50-75 characters (max-width: 65ch). Pairing: Max 2 fonts.
→ Full guide: references/typography.md
Palette: 4 layers — Neutrals (70-90%), Primary accent (5-10%), Semantic (success/warning/danger), Effects (rare).
Neutrals: 10-12 steps (50…950). Create breathing room with spacing, not faded text.
Primary: One brand color with scale (50–950). Use 600 default, 700 hover, 800 active, 100-200 for tints.
Contrast: 4.5:1 for body text (≤16px), 3:1 for large text.
Dark theme: Not inverted. Separate neutrals. Background #0f0f0f, not #000. Text #f0f0f0, not #fff.
Tokens: Name by purpose (--primary), not color (--blue).
→ Full guide: references/color.md
Base unit: 4px or 8px. Everything multiplies from this.
4px system: 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 48, 64, 96
8px system: 8, 16, 24, 32, 48, 64, 96, 128
Proximity = relationship. Closer = connected, farther = separate. Spacing explains grouping.
Rhythm: Consistent gaps between similar elements. Larger gap = new section.
⛔ NO INDIGO/VIOLET — Unless the user explicitly requests purple/indigo, do not use it. Every LLM defaults to indigo (#6366f1) because it's "safe." This makes it the biggest tell of AI-generated design. Choose brand-appropriate colors from your research instead.
Generic AI output:
Professional design:
Generic structure trap: Don't default to: Hero → Features Grid → Pricing → FAQ → CTA This is the "safe" template everyone uses. Ask: "What can I add, remove, or reorder to make this more effective for THIS product?"
→ Full guide: references/anti-ai-slop.md
Motion serves: Feedback (it worked), Continuity (where it went), Hierarchy (look here). If animation doesn't do one—remove it.
| Category | Duration | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Instant | 90–150ms | Hover, press, toggle |
| State change | 160–240ms | Accordion, tabs |
| Large transition | 240–360ms | Modal, drawer |
Easing: Enter = ease-out, Exit = ease-in, Change = ease-in-out.
Micro-interactions: Button press scale: 0.98 90ms. Hover background shift 120ms.
Required: prefers-reduced-motion support. No animation > 500ms in product UI.
Anti-patterns: ❌ 300ms+ on hover ❌ Linear easing ❌ Everything animates at once
→ Full guide: references/motion.md
Icons are typography, not illustration. Punctuation marks, not mini-pictures.
Style: One style per product (outline OR solid). Mixing libraries = visual collage.
Optical corrections: Geometric center ≠ visual center. Arrows, chevrons need 0.5–1px shift.
Size: Match text's visual weight. Icon height ≈ text line-height or smaller.
Color: currentColor inherits automatically. Semantic colors only for status.
Accessibility: Action icons need aria-label. Hit area 44×44px minimum.
Libraries: Lucide (SaaS default), Heroicons (Tailwind), Material Symbols, SF Symbols (Apple).
→ Full guide: references/icons.md
STOP: Fill this table before writing any code.
| Element | Your Answer | Implementation |
|---|---|---|
| Hook (first 3 sec) | _______________ | Hero headline + visual |
| Story arc | Problem → Solution → Proof → Action | Section order |
| Objection killers | 1. _____ 2. _____ 3. _____ | Specific placement |
| Trust signals | [ ] Social proof [ ] Guarantee [ ] Security [ ] Specifics | Which and where |
| Urgency/Scarcity | _____ or "N/A — explain why" | If applicable |
| The memorable thing | _____ | What will they screenshot? |
Required trust signals (pick at least 2):
If you can't fill this table, you're designing decoration, not persuasion.
~80% proven patterns + ~20% unique choices.
Where to add distinctiveness:
Test: "If someone screenshots this, would they know it's from THIS product?"
Complete design specification:
Goal: Build it. Validate against references and quality standards.
→ For implementation details (forms, focus, images, touch, performance): references/craft-details.md
| Category | Check |
|---|---|
| Functional | Primary action obvious? Error states? Works on mobile? |
| Visual | Squint test passes? Spacing rhythm? Typography intentional? Details polished? |
| Persuasion | Hook in 3 sec? 2+ trust signals? Objections addressed? Microcopy has personality? |
| Polish | No orphaned words? Icons aligned? Buttons consistent? Something memorable? |
Place your implementation next to top 3 references.
Target: Match or exceed in 3/4 criteria:
For a complete walkthrough (SaaS churn reduction), see references/example-workflow.md.
| Guide | What's Inside |
|---|---|
| typography.md | Scale, pairing, weight, line-height, letter-spacing, responsive type |
| color.md | Palette structure, neutrals, primary/semantic colors, dark theme, tokens |
| motion.md | Micro-interactions, timing, easing, reduced motion, animation tokens |
| icons.md | Grid system, optical corrections, accessibility, icon+text pairing |
| craft-details.md | Focus states, forms, images, touch, performance, accessibility |
| anti-ai-slop.md | What makes designs look generic and how to avoid it |
| mcp-tools.md |
Don't guess. Research with Refero. Craft with intention. Infuse it with soul.
Weekly Installs
724
Repository
GitHub Stars
14
First Seen
Feb 28, 2026
Security Audits
Gen Agent Trust HubPassSocketPassSnykWarn
Installed on
codex716
cursor715
cline713
gemini-cli713
opencode713
github-copilot713
前端打磨(Polish)终极指南:提升产品细节与用户体验的系统化检查清单
32,000 周安装
| "trustworthy", "premium", "friendly" + [type] |
| Feeling-driven search |
| Similar approaches | get_screen + include_similar: true |
| Need to see the UI | image_size: "thumbnail" or "full" |
| Display (48px+) | -0.02 to -0.03em (tighten more) |
| Detailed Refero tool parameters and usage |
| example-workflow.md | Full walkthrough example |