Portfolio Ui Audit

• Look for uneven vertical spacing between sections, cards, labels, and paragraphs.
• Flag sections that feel cramped, floaty, or inconsistent with the rest of the site.
• Call out when section transitions feel abrupt or when pages lose momentum.

Typography

• Review heading scale, paragraph width, line length, and label treatment.
• Flag places where typography feels generic, too dense, or under-emphasized.
• Prefer feedback that improves clarity and perceived quality, not novelty for its own sake.

Components

• Check cards for consistency in height, copy density, hover behavior, thumbnail treatment, and CTA placement.
• Check buttons for repeated styling logic and wording consistency.
• Flag any component that looks out of place, over-styled, or under-finished.

Motion and Interactions

• Review hover states, reveal effects, transitions, and animated treatments.
• Call out motion that feels default, distracting, too subtle to matter, or too flashy for a premium portfolio.
• Prefer subtle, confident interaction polish over decorative effects.

Trust Signals

• Review proof sections, testimonials, project cards, and supporting UI details.
• Flag any presentation choice that lowers trust, such as generic cards, weak proof framing, or inconsistent polish.
• Note where design choices make real proof feel decorative instead of authoritative.

Generic or AI-Generated Signals

• Flag layouts, copy treatment, or visual patterns that feel interchangeable with generic portfolio templates.
• Be especially alert to:
  • repetitive card styling
  • default-looking section patterns
  • bland CTA treatment
  • overuse of decorative labels without hierarchy
  • vague polish that looks "nice" but not distinctive

Output Format

Always structure the audit as:

1. Executive summary
2. Top issues by priority
3. High-impact UI improvements
4. Quick polish wins
5. Optional page-specific notes

Output Rules

• Prioritize findings that materially improve perceived quality and conversion.
• Be direct and specific.
• Tie every recommendation to visible impact.
• Avoid code refactoring advice unless the user explicitly asks for implementation details.
• Avoid generic filler like "improve spacing" without saying where and why.