Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索只读github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

cognitive-walkthrough认知演练

Agent Skill

cognitive-walkthrough 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

2,938

周安装

120

GitHub Stars

21

下载量

941
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:cognitive-walkthrough(认知演练)
来源仓库:https://github.com/mastepanoski/claude-skills
仓库路径:skills/cognitive-walkthrough
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/mastepanoski/claude-skills --skill cognitive-walkthrough
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/mastepanoski/claude-skills --skill cognitive-walkthrough

简介

cognitive-walkthrough 模拟新手用户完成特定任务的思考过程,识别卡点与困惑。

  • 适用于在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中进行细粒度可用性评估。
  • 聚焦任务特定路径,比启发式评估更具深度与针对性。
  • 结合 Don Norman 与 Nielsen 原则提供改进建议。
  • 需明确指定目标任务与用户角色,避免泛化分析。

SKILL.md

Cognitive Walkthrough

This skill enables AI agents to perform a task-specific usability evaluation using the Cognitive Walkthrough method, a technique that simulates how users (especially novices) think through completing specific tasks in an interface.

Unlike broad heuristic evaluations, Cognitive Walkthrough provides deep analysis of particular user journeys, identifying where users get stuck, confused, or make errors.

Use this skill when you need granular, task-focused insights into learnability and ease of first use.

Combine with "Nielsen Heuristics" for general usability, "Don Norman Principles" for intuitive design, or "WCAG Accessibility" for inclusive access.

When to Use This Skill

Invoke this skill when:

  • Analyzing specific user tasks (e.g., "complete checkout", "upload a file")
  • Evaluating learnability for first-time users
  • Identifying points of confusion in a flow
  • Debugging why users fail to complete tasks
  • Assessing onboarding or critical user journeys
  • Comparing alternative designs for the same task
  • Preparing for usability testing (hypothesis generation)

Inputs Required

When executing this walkthrough, gather:

  • task_description: Specific task to evaluate (e.g., "Create a new account and add first item to wishlist") [REQUIRED]
  • user_persona: Target user type (novice/intermediate/expert, demographics, goals, prior experience) [REQUIRED]
  • interface_description: Description of the interface (web/mobile app, key features) [REQUIRED]
  • screenshots_or_prototype: Visual references of the interface [OPTIONAL but highly recommended]
  • starting_point: Where the task begins (e.g., "homepage", "logged-in dashboard") [OPTIONAL, defaults to common entry point]
  • success_criteria: How to know task is complete [OPTIONAL, inferred from task if not specified]

The Cognitive Walkthrough Method

Cognitive Walkthrough evaluates four key questions at each step:

For Each Action in the Task:

Q1: Will users try to achieve the right effect?

  • Do users understand what they need to do next?
  • Is the goal of this step clear?
  • Does it match their mental model of the task?

Q2: Will users notice that the correct action is available?

  • Is the control/action visible?
  • Can users find what they need to interact with?
  • Is it discoverable without hunting?

Q3: Will users associate the correct action with the effect they're trying to achieve?

  • Does the control's appearance/label suggest it will do what they want?
  • Is there a clear connection between action and goal?
  • Are affordances and signifiers clear?

Q4: If the correct action is performed, will users see that progress is being made?

  • Is there immediate feedback?
  • Does the system confirm the action succeeded?
  • Can users tell they're closer to their goal?

Walkthrough Procedure

Follow these steps systematically:

Step 1: Define the Context (5 minutes)

  1. Identify the task:

- What is the user trying to accomplish? - What is the success criteria? - Example: "Add a product to cart and proceed to checkout"

  1. Define the user:

- Experience level: First-time user / Occasional user / Expert - Domain knowledge: Novice / Familiar / Expert - Technical proficiency: Low / Medium / High - Context: Desktop / Mobile / Tablet, Time pressure, Environment - Motivation: Why are they doing this task?

  1. Establish starting state:

- Where does the task begin? (homepage, search results, profile page) - What do users already know? - What are they thinking/feeling at the start?

Step 2: Decompose the Task (10 minutes)

Break the task into atomic actions (smallest meaningful steps):

Example Task: "Create account and add item to wishlist"

  1. Navigate to homepage
  2. Find "Sign Up" or "Create Account" button
  3. Click "Sign Up" button
  4. Locate email field
  5. Enter email address
  6. Locate password field
  7. Enter password
  8. Click "Create Account" button
  9. Wait for confirmation/redirect
  10. Navigate to product page
  11. Find "Add to Wishlist" button
  12. Click "Add to Wishlist"
  13. Confirm item was added

Key principle: Each action should be a single, observable user behavior.

Step 3: Walk Through Each Action (30-60 minutes)

For each action, answer the 4 cognitive questions:

Action Template:

## Action [N]: [Description]

**User's Goal at this step:** [What they're trying to accomplish]
**Current State:** [What they see/where they are]

### Q1: Will users try to achieve the right effect?
- **Analysis**: [Will users know what to do next?]
- **Issues**: [Problems if any]
- **Rating**: ✅ Clear / ⚠️ Unclear / ❌ Confusing

### Q2: Will users notice the correct action is available?
- **Analysis**: [Is the control visible/findable?]
- **Issues**: [Problems if any]
- **Rating**: ✅ Visible / ⚠️ Somewhat hidden / ❌ Hidden

### Q3: Will users associate action with intended effect?
- **Analysis**: [Does the control suggest what it does?]
- **Issues**: [Problems if any]
- **Rating**: ✅ Clear / ⚠️ Ambiguous / ❌ Misleading

### Q4: Will users see progress is being made?
- **Analysis**: [Is there feedback after the action?]
- **Issues**: [Problems if any]
- **Rating**: ✅ Clear feedback / ⚠️ Delayed/weak / ❌ No feedback

### Critical Issues Found:
- [Issue 1]
- [Issue 2]

### Recommendations:
- [Specific improvement 1]
- [Specific improvement 2]

---

Step 4: Synthesize Findings (15 minutes)

After walking through all actions:

  1. Identify failure points:

- Where did multiple questions get ❌ or ⚠️ ratings? - Which steps are most likely to cause user confusion? - Where might users give up?

  1. Categorize issues:

- Critical blockers: Users likely can't complete task - Major friction: Users struggle significantly but may succeed - Minor issues: Small delays or confusion - Cognitive load: Mental effort required

  1. Calculate success likelihood:

- Estimate % of target users who would complete task on first try - Identify most common failure modes

  1. Prioritize improvements:

- Quick wins (easy fixes, high impact) - Major redesigns (complex fixes, high impact) - Nice-to-haves (easy fixes, low impact)

Step 5: Generate Report (10 minutes)

Create comprehensive walkthrough report (see format below).


Report Structure

# Cognitive Walkthrough Report

**Task**: [Task description]
**User Persona**: [User type and characteristics]
**Interface**: [System/app being evaluated]
**Date**: [Date]
**Evaluator**: [AI Agent]

---

## Executive Summary

### Task Success Prediction
**Estimated Success Rate (First Attempt)**: [X]% of target users

### Critical Findings
1. [Most critical issue]
2. [Second critical issue]
3. [Third critical issue]

### Overall Assessment
[2-3 sentence summary of learnability]

---

## User Context

### Target User Profile
- **Experience Level**: [Novice/Intermediate/Expert]
- **Domain Knowledge**: [Description]
- **Technical Proficiency**: [Low/Medium/High]
- **Device/Context**: [Desktop/Mobile, environment]
- **Motivation**: [Why they're doing this]
- **Prior Experience**: [What they already know]

### Task Definition
**Goal**: [What user wants to accomplish]
**Success Criteria**: [How to know they succeeded]
**Starting Point**: [Where task begins]

---

## Step-by-Step Walkthrough

### Action 1: [Navigate to homepage]

**User's Goal**: Find where to start creating an account
**Current State**: User just arrived at homepage

#### Q1: Will users try to achieve the right effect?
- **Analysis**: Users typically look for "Sign Up", "Register", or "Create Account" in header/nav
- **Issues**: None expected - standard mental model
- **Rating**: ✅ Clear

#### Q2: Will users notice the correct action is available?
- **Analysis**: "Sign Up" button is in top-right corner of header (standard location)
- **Issues**: Small text (12px), low contrast (#999 on #FFF = 2.8:1)
- **Rating**: ⚠️ Somewhat hidden

#### Q3: Will users associate action with intended effect?
- **Analysis**: "Sign Up" is standard terminology, clearly indicates account creation
- **Issues**: None
- **Rating**: ✅ Clear

#### Q4: Will users see progress is being made?
- **Analysis**: N/A - no action taken yet (just viewing)
- **Issues**: N/A
- **Rating**: N/A

#### Critical Issues:
- **Low contrast on "Sign Up" button** - WCAG fail, hard to see
- Button is small (24px height) - mobile users may struggle

#### Recommendations:
1. Increase contrast to 4.5:1 minimum (WCAG AA)
2. Increase button size to 44px (touch target guideline)
3. Consider more prominent placement or visual weight

---

[Continue for all actions...]

---

## Failure Points Analysis

### Critical Blockers (Users likely to fail)

**1. Action 7: Create password with complexity requirements**
- **Problem**: Password requirements not shown until after submission fails
- **Impact**: Users guess rules, get frustrated by repeated errors
- **Affected Users**: 70-80% of novices
- **Severity**: Critical
- **Fix Priority**: P0 (Must fix)
- **Recommendation**: Show requirements inline before user types

**2. Action 12: Find "Add to Wishlist" button**
- **Problem**: Icon-only button (heart icon) with no label, not obvious
- **Impact**: Users don't see it or don't understand what it does
- **Affected Users**: 50-60% of first-time users
- **Severity**: High
- **Fix Priority**: P1 (Should fix)
- **Recommendation**: Add text label "Add to Wishlist" next to icon

### Major Friction Points

[Continue...]

### Minor Issues

[Continue...]

---

## Success Probability by User Type

| User Type | Estimated Success Rate | Time to Complete | Confidence |
|-----------|------------------------|------------------|------------|
| **Novice** | 45% | 8-12 minutes | Low frustration tolerance |
| **Intermediate** | 75% | 4-6 minutes | Moderate confidence |
| **Expert** | 95% | 2-3 minutes | High efficiency |

**Target**: Novices should have ≥80% success rate with ≤5 minutes time.

**Gap**: Current design falls short for novices by 35 percentage points.

---

## Cognitive Load Assessment

### Memory Burden
- **Items to remember**: [List what users must recall]
- **Rating**: Low / Medium / High
- **Issue**: [If high, explain why]

### Decision Points
- **Choices users make**: [Number and complexity]
- **Rating**: Low / Medium / High
- **Issue**: [Unnecessary decisions increase cognitive load]

### Error Recovery
- **How easy to fix mistakes**: [Analysis]
- **Rating**: Easy / Moderate / Difficult
- **Issue**: [Problems with undo/back/reset]

---

## Prioritized Recommendations

### Phase 1: Critical Fixes (1-2 weeks)

**1. Show password requirements inline (Action 7)**
- **Why**: Eliminates #1 failure point
- **Impact**: +25% success rate for novices
- **Effort**: Low (4 hours)

**2. Add text label to wishlist button (Action 12)**
- **Why**: Makes feature discoverable
- **Impact**: +15% task completion
- **Effort**: Low (2 hours)

**3. Increase "Sign Up" button contrast (Action 1)**
- **Why**: Accessibility + discoverability
- **Impact**: +10% users find starting point
- **Effort**: Low (1 hour)

**Total Phase 1 Impact**: +50% novice success rate (45% → 67.5%)

---

### Phase 2: Major Improvements (1-2 months)

[Continue with medium priority items...]

---

### Phase 3: Polish (3+ months)

[Continue with nice-to-have improvements...]

---

## Alternative Design Suggestions

Based on walkthrough findings, consider these alternative approaches:

### Alternative 1: Progressive Disclosure for Signup
**Current**: All fields shown at once
**Proposed**: Step-by-step (email → password → confirm)
**Pros**: Reduces cognitive load, clearer feedback per step
**Cons**: More clicks, may feel slower
**Recommendation**: A/B test with target users

### Alternative 2: Social Sign-Up
**Current**: Email/password only
**Proposed**: Add "Sign up with Google/Apple"
**Pros**: Faster, no password to remember
**Cons**: Privacy concerns, dependency on third-party
**Recommendation**: Offer as option alongside email signup

[Continue with other alternatives...]

---

## Comparison to Best Practices

| Practice | Current Implementation | Recommendation |
|----------|------------------------|----------------|
| Password requirements visibility | Hidden until error | Show inline before typing |
| Button sizing (mobile) | 24px | 44px minimum |
| Color contrast | 2.8:1 (WCAG fail) | 4.5:1 (WCAG AA) |
| Error messages | Generic | Specific and actionable |
| Confirmation feedback | Weak | Clear success messages |

---

## Next Steps

1. **Prioritize fixes**: Start with Phase 1 critical items
2. **Prototype improvements**: Create clickable mockups with changes
3. **User testing**: Validate findings with 5-8 target users
4. **Iterate**: Run another cognitive walkthrough after changes
5. **Monitor metrics**: Track task completion rates, time-on-task, error rates

---

## Methodology Notes

- **Method**: Cognitive Walkthrough (Wharton et al., 1994)
- **Evaluator**: AI agent simulating UX expert
- **Perspective**: Novice user (first-time, no training)
- **Limitations**:
  - Based on interface analysis, not actual user behavior
  - Success rates are estimates, not measured data
  - Should be validated with real user testing

---

## References

- Wharton, C., Rieman, J., Lewis, C., & Polson, P. (1994). "The Cognitive Walkthrough Method"
- Nielsen, J. (1994). "Heuristic Evaluation"
- Spencer, R. (2000). "The Streamlined Cognitive Walkthrough Method"

---

**Version**: 1.0
**Date**: [Date]

Key Principles of Cognitive Walkthrough

1. Focus on Learnability

  • Emphasis on first-time use, not expert performance
  • "Can users figure it out?" vs. "Is it efficient?"

2. Question-Driven Analysis

  • The 4 questions provide structured evaluation
  • Every action is scrutinized from user perspective

3. Task-Specific

  • Evaluates actual user goals, not general interface
  • Deep dive vs. broad sweep

4. Theory-Grounded

  • Based on cognitive psychology (information processing theory)
  • Simulates human problem-solving process

5. Predictive Method

  • Identifies issues before user testing
  • Generates testable hypotheses

Common Walkthrough Findings

Typical Issues Discovered:

Discoverability Problems:

  • Hidden buttons or controls
  • Unlabeled icons
  • Non-standard locations
  • Poor visual hierarchy

Unclear Affordances:

  • Links that don't look clickable
  • Buttons that look disabled
  • Confusing icon meanings
  • Misleading labels

Feedback Failures:

  • No confirmation after actions
  • Unclear error messages
  • No progress indicators
  • Silent failures

Mental Model Mismatches:

  • Unexpected behavior
  • Counter-intuitive flows
  • Inconsistent patterns
  • Violates conventions

Cognitive Load:

  • Too many choices
  • Requiring memory of previous screens
  • Complex multi-step processes
  • Unclear next steps

Success Metrics

Measure walkthrough effectiveness:

Before Walkthrough:

  • Baseline task completion rate
  • Average time on task
  • Error rate
  • User satisfaction scores

After Implementing Fixes:

  • Improved completion rate (target: +20-40%)
  • Reduced time on task (target: -30-50%)
  • Lower error rate (target: -40-60%)
  • Higher satisfaction (target: +1-2 points on 5-point scale)

Combining with Other Methods

Use cognitive walkthrough when:

  • You have specific tasks to evaluate
  • You need deep, granular insights
  • You're early in design (pre-user testing)
  • You want to predict first-use issues

Complement with:

  • Nielsen Heuristics: General usability issues
  • Don Norman Principles: Intuitive design assessment
  • WCAG Audit: Accessibility compliance
  • User Testing: Validate predictions with real users
  • Analytics: Quantitative validation (funnels, drop-off)

Tips for Effective Walkthroughs

  1. Be specific about users: "Novice" is better than "user"; "65+ non-tech-savvy" is even better
  2. Stay in character: Think like the user, not the designer
  3. Document assumptions: What does the user know? What don't they know?
  4. Be honest about issues: Don't rationalize or excuse bad design
  5. Provide actionable recommendations: "Unclear" → "Add tooltip explaining X"
  6. Quantify when possible: "50% of users" vs. "some users"
  7. Consider context: Time pressure, mobile vs. desktop, distractions
  8. Test assumptions: Validate findings with actual users

Version

1.0 - Initial release


Remember: Cognitive Walkthrough is a predictive method. While it's highly effective at identifying learnability issues, always validate findings with real users through usability testing.

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

36.49%
按下载量换算343

Claude

28.87%
按下载量换算272

Cursor

19.3%
按下载量换算182

Gemini CLI

10.81%
按下载量换算102

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills