Most teams know their design system has problems. What they usually lack is a way to say where, and how bad, without turning it into a six-week audit first. This is that shortcut: a structured self-assessment across the five subjects a healthy system is actually graded on, scored as you go.
It covers the same five dimensions I use when I review a real system: component consistency, accessibility, token architecture, documentation, and the handoff process. Answer thirty-two short prompts and a written report tells you what to tackle first, and what to leave alone.
Take the assessment
For each prompt, pick No, Partial, or Yes. Nobody is grading you, so answer honestly: a flattering score helps no one. Subject grades appear live and the running total tracks as you go. Finish every row and a full report appears with where you stand and where to start.
Total score so far
0/64
Questions answered
0/32
Scroll for your final report →
Teacher's report
Keep going. Answer every question to unlock your report.
Overall grade
-
Final score
0/64
Pick a choice for every question and a personalized writeup will appear here with the two things I'd prioritize first.
What the score is really measuring
The five subjects are not arbitrary. Component consistency is what users feel and what reviewers argue about. Accessibility is the floor the whole thing stands on. Token architecture decides whether a change lands once or thirty times. Documentation determines whether anyone but you can use the system. And the handoff process is what keeps all of the above from quietly rotting the month after launch.
A low grade in one subject is not a crisis. A low grade you did not know about is. The point of a snapshot is to turn a vague unease into a specific, rankable list you can bring to a planning conversation.
This scorecard is also a work sample
It is built the way I build production work: accessible radio groups, live scoring, no frameworks under the hood, the same tokens as the rest of this site. Tab through it; the keyboard path is real. If the snapshot surfaces something worth fixing properly, a full design system audit replaces the self-assessment with specifics, ranked by severity and paired with the order to fix them in.