- Home
- Skills
- Frontend & Web Apps
- Escape AI Slop — A Layout Reasoning Guide
Works with the AI Agents you already use
Escape AI Slop — A Layout Reasoning Guide
Use it standalone to critique an existing layout in plain text, or layer it onto your own mockup/LP-building workflow so every generation benefits.
$15
Escape AI Slop — A Layout Reasoning Guide
Example session with this skill installed
Here's our current Hero section for LOOP THREAD (screenshot attached). It reads clean, but a little generic. Before we touch any code, critique it against eye-tracking layout models and cognitive biases, and sketch 3 structurally different directions in plain text — no code yet, I want to pick a direction first.
Current markup
- Left: square-ish product photo (~600px)
- Right: eyebrow label ("Traceable Everyday Basics") → H1 ("Honest thread from seed to garment") → body copy → two CTAs ("Explore the Collection" / "Trace supply chain")
- White background, roughly 60/40 image-to-text split
- Read your context and instructions
- Compiled the escape ai slop
Reading the current state first
- Structure: image-left, text-right, roughly 60/40 — if I described this out loud as "photo on one side, copy and buttons on the other, split down the middle," that description alone is the tell. A topology model may have been intended, but nothing forces the DOM to prove it; this is the default split most agents converge on without deciding to.
- Color: background is white. That's already the right call under a white-first default — no fix needed here.
- Cognitive bug risk: both CTAs live together in the one spot every visitor expects a CTA to be — the hero. Nothing below the fold echoes them. That's banner-blindness territory: the exact zone visitors have learned to tune out is the only place asking them to act.
Three structurally different directions (plain text, no code):
Direction 1 — Bottom-anchored, photo-led
┌──────────────────────────────────┐
│ Traceable Everyday Basics │
│ Honest thread, quietly told. │
│ [Explore] [Trace supply chain] │
├────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ FULL-BLEED PRODUCT PHOTOGRAPH │
│ (edge-to-edge, cropped by the │
│ fold — carries the full weight) │
└────────────────────────────────────┘
Quiet copy up top, a single large photograph doing all the visual work at the bottom of the first screen. Fits a brand whose whole pitch is "look at the supply chain" — the photo is the proof, not a decoration next to the proof. Bonus: the CTA row now sits above a hard visual break instead of floating in "the usual hero corner," which softens the banner-blindness risk from the current version.
Direction 2 — Offset, overlapping
┌──────────────────────────────────┐
│ Traceable Everyday Basics │
│ Honest thread ┌────────┐ │
│ from seed to ┌─────┤ PHOTO │ │
│ garment. │PHOTO│ (bleeds│ │
│ [Explore][Trace] └─────┤ off │ │
│ │ edge) │ │
└─────────────────────────┴────────┘
Same zigzag idea as the current split, but the photo overlaps the text block and bleeds off the right edge instead of sitting in its own clean column. The asymmetry and overlap are what make it read as designed rather than assembled — a straight 50/50 (or 60/40) division never does.
Direction 3 — Single-column, punctuated
┌──────────────────────────────────┐
│ Traceable Everyday Basics │
│ Honest thread from seed │
│ to garment. │
│ [Explore] [Trace supply] │
├────────────────────────────────────┤
│ FULL-BLEED PHOTO BREAK │
├────────────────────────────────────┤
│ (traceability story continues │
│ down a single centered column) │
└────────────────────────────────────┘
Centered, narrow, one statement at a time — a full-bleed photo interrupts the column rather than sitting beside it. Matches the "basics, nothing extra" brand voice more literally than a side-by-side layout does.
One cross-cutting note regardless of which direction you pick: add at least one inline CTA further down the page (e.g. after the Traceability Index teaser) so the hero pair isn't the only ask on the page — that's the concrete fix for the banner-blindness risk flagged above.
No code was touched. Pick a direction (or mix elements from more than one) and it gets implemented from there.
Connects securely to your tools. The creator never sees your data.
About this skill
This is a reasoning guide, not a generator. It doesn't write layout code by itself — it reshapes how your agent thinks about layout before it writes any code, wherever that code gets written. Use it standalone to critique an existing layout in plain text, or layer it onto your own mockup/LP-building workflow so every generation benefits.
Left unchecked, a text-based agent defaults to whatever layout is statistically "safest": a centered hero, a symmetric 2-column split, a cream/sand/terracotta background — the pattern now widely recognized as "AI slop." This skill exists to break that reflex by reinterpreting real eye-tracking physiology and cognitive biases as concrete structural constraints.
What it does
-
Applies four eye-tracking topology models (Z-pattern, F-pattern, I-pattern, bottom-up) as DOM-level structural constraints, not just visual styling
-
Forbids each model's own "reflex rendering" (e.g. Z-pattern always becoming alternating image-left/right rows) and requires picking from genuinely different alternatives
-
Varies density, image treatment, typographic voice and conversion path as independent axes — together with the model and rendering, each pattern gets a five-point declaration, so multiple layout options never converge on "the same design with different colors"
-
Counters three specific cognitive biases — banner blindness, tunnel vision, the gestalt/proximity trap — with named countermeasures at concrete spots in the layout
-
Breaks the "safe nuance palette" reflex: white is the default background unless the brief gives a real reason otherwise, and color combinations are chosen deliberately from color theory (complementary, analogous, triadic, split-complementary, monochromatic, achromatic + accent)
-
When multiple options are requested, sketches one extra candidate internally and prunes the weakest before any code is written — a selection, not just the first ideas that came to mind
-
Adds a short plain-language aim statement to every delivered pattern: what the eye-path does, how dense it is, and where the conversion path leads
-
Lets reading sections (pricing, FAQ, spec lists) borrow one declared guest micro-pattern from another model — at most two per page, never the hero, each with a functional reason
-
Optionally keeps a pattern log, so regenerating the same brief later doesn't repeat combinations you've already seen
Two ways to use it
-
Standalone: paste or describe an existing layout and ask for a critique, or for plain-text alternative directions with ASCII sketches — no code until you pick one. Nothing else needs to be installed.
-
Layered onto your own workflow: if you already generate mockups or landing pages some other way, this skill's reasoning kicks in automatically on a layout request and shapes whatever gets built.
Also covers
Retrofitting a single section of an already-working page (spend the structural accent only where it matters, leave proven conventional patterns alone elsewhere), and mobile-primary briefs (Z/F-pattern's left-right alternation has nowhere to go on a narrow viewport, so the model pool correctly narrows instead of forcing a desktop pattern into a single column).
Requirements
A Claude Code agent. No dependencies, no Figma, no MCP server, no network or terminal calls. The only file access is the optional pattern log: if a pattern-log.md exists in your project root it is read at the start of a multi-pattern run, and after the delivery the skill asks once whether to record the run's combinations. It writes the file only if you say yes, and never when invoked non-interactively (for example from a pipeline). Any other file writes happen wherever the layout is actually built.
Find more skills like this on the Claude Skills Marketplace, the Codex Skills Marketplace and the Gemini Skills Marketplace, or browse Claude Humanizer Skills.
This skill doesn't generate a layout by itself — it needs something to reason about (a description, a screenshot's contents, pasted markup, or a generation workflow it can steer). Only four base eye-tracking topology models exist; a 5th requested variation becomes a deliberate no-model "standard" baseline, and a 6th or beyond reuses a model with a genuinely different structural sub-variant rather than a plain repeat. For a mobile-primary brief, the page-level model pool narrows to two (I-pattern and Bottom-up) since the other two models' left-right alternation has no room on a narrow viewport (candidates may then share a model, and are told apart by section-level micro-patterns and the rest of the declaration). The optional pattern log only prevents repeating a full five-point combination, and it only works if you keep the file between runs.
How to use
- 1
Connect your agent to the Agensi MCP
Copy the prompt and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor or any agent that supports MCP. It sets up the connection for you. Manual setup
- 2
Sign in to Agensi
Your agent shows a sign-in link. Sign in and click Allow.
- 3
Ask for what you need
Your agent loads this skill and uses it on your task. It always asks before buying a skill.
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be one of the first to try it. Every listed skill goes through the trust checks below.
Security scanned
Checked by our 8-point scan before listing
Fresh listing
Recently published to Agensi
Money-back guarantee
Doesn't do what its page promises? You get your money back.
Trust & safety
Security scan
Security scan passed 15 days ago
Permissions
File Scopes
This skill contains no executable code and makes no network or terminal calls. It only changes how the agent reasons about layout before generating UI code. Its single file access is an optional pattern log: it reads pattern-log.md in the project root if one exists, and after a multi-pattern delivery it asks once whether to record the run's combinations — it writes that one file only if you say yes, and never when invoked non-interactively. Any other file writes happen wherever the layout actually gets implemented (your own workflow, or a plain-text critique with no writes at all).