---
name: usability-research
description: Plan task-based usability studies and analyze supplied observations for a specific interface or flow. Use for research questions, participant tasks, neutral discussion guides or evidence synthesis; distinguish proposed studies, heuristic review and actual participant findings.
user-invocable: true
metadata:
  scope: generic
  invocation: both
  role: support
---

# Investigate usability with observable tasks

Choose research to resolve a user question or inform a decision. Use for requested study preparation or supplied observations; routine UI work can use [interface quality](../interface-quality/SKILL.md) without a study. [Interaction design](../interaction-design/SKILL.md) owns the proposed flow.

## Frame the decision and method

Inspect the intended experience, known constraints and supplied flow, frame or prototype. Identify the decision, relevant users/tasks and uncertainty. Use available context; ask only for facts that change the study and label planning assumptions.

Choose a method that can answer the question: task observation for completion/recovery, or a scoped concept/wording inquiry when appropriate. Justify participant variation, recruitment, session length and sample through the decision and access limits. Quantitative coverage or population claims need an applicable source/model, assumptions and uncertainty; otherwise state the qualitative learning aim. A proposed sample remains a plan until recruitment occurs.

## Observe without coaching

Give participants realistic goals and observable end states while leaving them to discover the interaction. Separate moderator setup, participant instructions and neutral follow-up probes. Recovery tasks can start from naturally occurring failures or a moderator-prepared failed state; instructions should preserve the original goal without teaching an invalid attempt or its correction. Instructional/comprehension exercises answer a different question and need their own interpretation.

Prepare a concise moderator guide with purpose, think-aloud invitation, observations and neutral probes. Distinguish independent completion, assistance, errors/hesitation and subsequent interpretation. Check task feasibility in the prototype and trace tasks to research questions. Ratings require a stated question/scale and an interpretation justified by the method.

Use synthetic data where possible. Recruitment, contact, recording, private-data collection, publication and canvas writes require their own authorized scope and consent arrangements. A local guide or conversation can be sufficient output.

## Synthesize the evidence supplied

Separate observed behavior, participant statements, interpretation and proposed changes. Link findings to actual tasks/sessions/artifacts, protect identities, group repeated causes and preserve contradictory cases. Counts and quotes require supplied evidence.

Explain sample/prototype limitations and prioritize effects on the intended task. Recommend a bounded repair or next test and carry accepted findings into requirements/design. Return the study as prepared and unexecuted when no sessions occurred. Static critique, automated checks, agent exploration and simulated personas are different evidence sources; distinguish them from participant research and verify implemented repairs through the existing test loop.