2.9 KiB
Worked example — auditing a production marketing site
This is a real run of scripts/design-audit.mjs against a live single-page marketing site
(a financial-services firm's homepage), captured to show what the heuristic layer of the stack
produces before you wire it into your own project.
How it was produced
# serve the site, then audit it over HTTP (not file://, so asset/CORS noise is realistic)
python3 -m http.server 8099 # in the site directory
node scripts/design-audit.mjs --url http://localhost:8099/ --out examples/juniper-audit
What's here
report.md— ranked findings + console healthreport.json— the same, machine-readable (what CI consumes)screenshots/— full-page capture at all six viewport tiers (360 → 1920 px)
Reading the results
The site is genuinely well-built (design tokens, self-hosted fonts, prefers-reduced-motion,
scroll-reveal). The audit still surfaced three actionable items — exactly the kind a human
misses on a quick look:
| Finding | Severity | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| 2–3 sampled interactive elements show no visible focus indicator | High | Keyboard users can't see where they are — WCAG 2.4.7 |
| 14 tap targets < 44×44 px on mobile | Medium | Small touch targets → mis-taps on phones |
| ~1 text node below AA contrast (approximate) | Medium | Lead to verify by hand; contrast is estimated from the nearest opaque background |
The single console error is a 404 for one asset — worth chasing, but not a layout defect.
Two things this example teaches about the tooling
-
Serve over HTTP, not
file://. Opening viafile://produces a wall of font-CORS errors that are pure artifacts (browsers block cross-origin font fetches fromnullorigin). The numbers above are from a real HTTP serve, so the console is clean. -
Full-page capture + aggressive scroll-reveal don't fully mix. The script auto-scrolls to trigger
IntersectionObserverreveals before shooting, which recovers most content — but a page that reveals sections only on fine-grained scroll can still show a blank band in a single full-page screenshot. That's both a tooling limit and a real robustness signal (the same content is invisible to some crawlers, print, and any non-interactive capture). For those pages, the interactive/design-reviewsubagent — which scrolls naturally, waits, and interacts — is the more reliable check. Heuristics catch the mechanical defects; the subagent judges the experience.
The point
This is the fast, automatic half of the stack (also runs in CI). The full review —
interaction flows, visual taste, edge cases — is the design-review subagent invoked with
/design-review <url>. Use both: heuristics to gate merges, the subagent to raise the bar.