The standard for scoring
digital craft.

Intentional journeys that earn the visitor's time. Strategy must be visible in the design, not assumed.

• Clear information architecture that anticipates user questions and behaviors.
• Thoughtful micro-interactions that reduce friction and celebrate key actions.
• Evidence of user research or data-backed rationale behind the journey design.

9–10 Exceptional

9–10 — Journey reads like a case study. Every screen earns its place; the primary conversion path is unmistakable without being heavy-handed.

7–8 Strong

7–8 — Confident IA and flow. Minor friction in one or two secondary paths but the main story is clear.

4–6 Adequate

4–6 — Works, but the primary path requires interpretation. CTAs compete, hierarchy is muddled.

1–3 Weak

1–3 — Visitor has to reverse-engineer what the site wants from them.

Visuals that feel both original and unmistakably on brand. Decorative competence is not enough.

• Consistent design system with purposeful typography, color, and imagery choices.
• Cohesive storytelling that uses layout and motion to reinforce brand values.
• Inventive art direction or craftsmanship that differentiates the experience.

9–10 Exceptional

9–10 — Art direction you'd cite. Typography, color, and composition feel inevitable; the brand could not look like anything else.

7–8 Strong

7–8 — Polished and on-brand. Tasteful but recognizable — you've seen this language before.

4–6 Adequate

4–6 — Clean defaults. Tasteful template-grade work with no point of view.

1–3 Weak

1–3 — Inconsistent system, derivative choices, or visible craft defects.

Messaging that communicates value quickly and rewards deeper exploration. Words count as much as pixels.

• Succinct messaging hierarchy that resonates with target audiences.
• Editorial voice and tone that align with the product, service, or cause.
• Use of media (video, audio, data visualization) to enhance—not distract from—the narrative.

9–10 Exceptional

9–10 — Copy you'd quote. A distinctive voice carries the whole experience; media is load-bearing, not decorative.

7–8 Strong

7–8 — Clear, well-written, on-message. Voice is consistent but not memorable.

4–6 Adequate

4–6 — Reads like a brief. Functional copy, generic claims, media is filler.

1–3 Weak

1–3 — Jargon, padding, or contradictions between what the site says and what it shows.

Inclusive practices that serve diverse needs. Baseline compliance is the floor, not the ceiling.

• WCAG-informed color contrast, focus states, and semantic markup across templates.
• Keyboard and assistive-technology support for all key journeys.
• Inclusive language and localization considerations where relevant.

9–10 Exceptional

9–10 — Accessibility is part of the design language. Bespoke focus treatments, AT-friendly motion, demonstrably tested with users beyond the defaults.

7–8 Strong

7–8 — WCAG AA holds across the experience. Keyboard journeys work; nothing flagrant.

4–6 Adequate

4–6 — Meets the basics on the surface. Predictable failures appear on secondary pages or under keyboard navigation.

1–3 Weak

1–3 — Material barriers: contrast failures, missing focus states, broken keyboard paths, or inaccessible primary actions.

Engineering that makes the experience feel immediate, stable, and trustworthy. Heavy sites do not win.

• Optimized loading performance with sensible asset strategy and caching.
• Resilient engineering patterns that handle edge cases and error states gracefully.
• Progressive enhancement to maintain functionality across devices and bandwidths.

9–10 Exceptional

9–10 — Feels instant. Green Core Web Vitals on slow networks, graceful failure modes, no jank under interaction.

7–8 Strong

7–8 — Fast on good connections, mostly clean CWV. Minor layout shift or one slow asset.

4–6 Adequate

4–6 — Loads acceptably on desktop but stutters on mid-range mobile. Visible cumulative shift, slow LCP, or render-blocking work.

1–3 Weak

1–3 — Slow first paint, broken states under poor network, or visible regressions during normal use.

Layouts that adapt fluidly across breakpoints and input modes — not just a mobile fallback of the desktop view.

• Mobile-first layouts that preserve clarity and hierarchy.
• Touch-friendly controls, gestures, and accessible hit areas.
• Thoughtful adaptation for large screens, tablets, and emerging device categories.

9–10 Exceptional

9–10 — Each breakpoint feels native, not derived. Touch, pointer, and large-screen experiences each get deliberate design.

7–8 Strong

7–8 — Clean adaptation across common breakpoints. Tablet or ultra-wide gets less love than mobile and desktop.

4–6 Adequate

4–6 — Mobile is a shrunk-down desktop. Hit targets are small, gestures are inconsistent, content reflow is awkward.

1–3 Weak

1–3 — Layout breaks at common breakpoints, controls are unusable on touch, or important content is hidden on mobile.

Work that pushes the medium forward — original concepts, responsible use of new technology, durable thinking.

• Original concepts or interactions that advance the web as a medium.
• Ethical use of AI, automation, or personalization techniques.
• Roadmap signals—documentation, extensibility, or sustainability—that show long-term thinking.

9–10 Exceptional

9–10 — Teaches the rest of us something. Original interaction, novel technique, or a use of emerging tech that others will copy responsibly.

7–8 Strong

7–8 — A fresh take on a familiar pattern, executed cleanly.

4–6 Adequate

4–6 — Competent but derivative. Recognizable templates, current trends without commentary.

1–3 Weak

1–3 — Nothing here that the medium hasn't seen, or experimentation that fails the user.