Audit a Figma component library for consistency, coverage gaps, and naming issues. Use when asked to audit components, review a design system, check component consistency, identify missing components, or assess Figma library health. Produces a structured audit report with issues prioritised by impact, naming recommendations, and a fix plan.
Start a fresh conversation. Replace the highlighted placeholders.
Use figma-component-audit to audit [component list] for a [product type] design system at [maturity] maturity, returning prioritized consistency and coverage issues, naming recommendations, and a fix plan.
Required inputs
[component list]
[product type]
[maturity]
User-approved starter prompt based on a pinned source version; check current skill requirements before running. Task evidence ↗
SKILL.md
name: figma-component-auditdescription: "Audit a Figma component library for consistency, coverage gaps, and naming issues. Use when asked to audit components, review a design system, check component consistency, identify missing components, or assess Figma library health. Produces a structured audit report with issues prioritised by impact, naming recommendations, and a fix plan."
Figma Component Audit Skill
Produces a structured audit of a Figma component library — identifying inconsistencies, naming problems, coverage gaps, and prioritised recommendations.
Required Inputs
Component list or description (paste component names or describe what exists)
Product type (mobile app / web app / desktop / multi-platform)
Design system maturity (new / growing / mature / legacy)
Primary concern (optional)
Output Structure
1. Audit Summary
Dimension
Status
Score
Naming consistency
Red/Amber/Green
/10
Component coverage
/10
Variant completeness
/10
Documentation
/10
Overall health
/10
Verdict: What is the state of this library and the single most important thing to fix?
2. Naming Issues
For each problem:
Issue: [Problem type]
What is happening: [Specific examples]
Why it matters: [Impact on designers and developers]
Fix: [Exact naming convention to adopt]
Examples: Before / After
Naming convention to enforce:
Components: PascalCase (NavigationBar)
Variants: Lowercase with slashes (size/large, state/hover)
Pages: All caps (COMPONENTS, FOUNDATIONS)
3. Coverage Gaps
Missing Component
Priority
Why Needed
[Component]
High/Medium/Low
[Use case]
4. Variant Completeness Check
Component
Default
Hover
Active
Disabled
Error
Missing
[Button]
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Active, Error
5. Prioritised Fix Plan
#
Fix
Effort
Impact
Do First?
1
[Fix]
Low/Med/High
High
Yes
Quality Checks
Naming recommendations have before/after examples
Coverage gaps are relevant to the product type
Fix plan is ordered by impact-to-effort ratio
Variant completeness covers all interactive states
Anti-Patterns
Do not flag naming issues without providing a specific, consistent naming convention to adopt
Do not audit only visual consistency — also check for missing interactive states and accessibility compliance
Do not list all issues at equal priority — group by impact (Critical / Major / Minor) so the fix plan is actionable
Do not omit variant completeness — every interactive component must cover all required states
Do not leave coverage gaps without recommending specific missing components to add
Example Trigger Phrases
"Audit my Figma component library"
"Review our design system for consistency issues"
"What components are we missing in our Figma library?"