ui-architecture-review

<essential_principles>

Structure precedes style. If the information architecture is wrong, no amount of typography, haptics, or spring animations will fix it. This skill challenges logical structure before anyone touches pixels.

Every element must justify its existence. "Who needs this, how often, and what breaks if I remove it?" Elements that can't answer all three get killed or moved.

Concerns don't mix. Content creation, organization, media attachment, and mode switching are different concerns. Putting them in one flat menu creates a junk drawer, not a toolbar.

Reference apps are evidence, not inspiration. When Apple Notes, Things, Bear, Linear, and Notion all separate a concern the same way, that's a discovered pattern, not a style choice. </essential_principles>

This is the design equivalent of code review — challenge architecture, not aesthetics.

<quick_start> Given a component (code, screenshot, or description), run in this order:

1. Element justification — For each interactive element: who uses it, how often, what if removed? → KEEP / MOVE / MERGE / KILL
2. Concern separation — Are different concerns (creation, organization, attachment, destruction) mixed in one surface?
3. Cognitive friction — Apply CDN: viscosity, premature commitment, hidden dependencies, role expressiveness, diffuseness
4. Action hierarchy — Is there exactly ONE primary action? Are secondary actions same-concern? Are tertiary actions hidden?
5. UX laws — Apply relevant laws to quantify user cost: Hick's (choice count), Fitts's (target distance), Miller's (working memory load), Gestalt (false groupings), Doherty (latency perception)
6. Reference check — How do best-in-class apps solve this? What pattern emerges?
7. Synthesis — Recommended restructuring with rationale. Hand contradictions to TRIZ.

Read references/ for detailed frameworks on each step. </quick_start>

<reference_index> Domain knowledge in references/:

File	Content	Load when
cognitive-dimensions.md	CDN framework — 9 dimensions with scoring rubric	Analyzing interaction friction
action-hierarchy.md	Primary/secondary/tertiary patterns + reference app evidence	Auditing control placement and menu structure
ia-anti-patterns.md	Junk drawer, false peers, concern mixing, premature surfacing + fixes	Diagnosing structural problems
element-justification.md	Frequency-adoption matrix, kill criteria, Bastien-Scapin grouping rules	Deciding what should exist and what groups together
ux-laws.md	Fitts, Hick, Miller, Gestalt, Jakob's, Doherty, Peak-End — quantifiable user cost	Measuring user cost of structural decisions
</reference_index>

<output_format>

## IA Critique: [Component Name]

### Element Justification
| Element | Who | Frequency | If removed? | Verdict |
|---------|-----|-----------|-------------|---------|

### Concern Map
[Which concerns are present? Are any mixed in one surface?]

### Cognitive Friction (CDN)
[FRICTION and BROKEN dimensions only — skip OK ones]

### Hierarchy Violations
[Primary/secondary/tertiary misplacements]

### UX Law Violations
| Law | Evidence | Cost |
|-----|----------|------|
[Only laws that are violated — skip compliant ones]

### Reference Comparison
[How 2-3 best-in-class apps solve this differently]

### Recommended Architecture
[Proposed restructuring with rationale]

### Open Contradictions
[Trade-offs that need /triz-product-architect]

</output_format>