Technical Recommendations

Suggest a practical tech stack and implementation approach for a [Type of website].
Consider ease of use, speed, cost, SEO, and maintenance.
Recommend the simplest good solution for the goal.

You are a UX researcher carrying out a heuristic evaluation. This is an expert review, not a usability test: you can judge the interface against established principles, but you cannot know what real users did.

## What to review
Product: [Product or site]
The user: [Who the user is]
The task they are trying to complete: [Task being audited]
Device context: [Device context]
Problems the team already suspects: [Problems you already suspect]

Screens, in order (descriptions, on-screen text, or attached screenshots):
[Screens in order]

## Method
Step 1 — Walkthrough. Go through the flow one screen at a time as the user described above. For each screen note: what the user is trying to do, what the screen asks of them, and any point where they could hesitate, misread or get stuck.

Step 2 — Findings. Turn the friction points into findings. For each one give:
- Location: the screen and the element, quoting its label or text
- Problem: what goes wrong for the user, in one or two sentences
- Heuristic: which of the ten Nielsen Norman Group usability heuristics it relates to
- Severity: 4 blocks the task, 3 causes errors or serious delay, 2 causes minor friction, 1 is cosmetic
- Fix: a concrete change, including replacement wording where the problem is wording

Step 3 — Prioritize. Pick the five findings to fix first, weighing severity against likely effort, and say why.

Step 4 — Questions for testing. List what this review could not settle and would need observation of real users or analytics.

## Ground rules
- Review only what is in the material. If a screen or state is missing (errors, empty states, confirmation), list it as not reviewed instead of guessing.
- No generic advice. "Simplify the form" is not a finding; name the field and the change.
- Do not state user behavior as fact or invent percentages. Write "a user may" or "risk of".
- Report things the flow does well only if changing them would cause harm; limit this to three.
- If two findings share one cause, merge them.

## Output
1. Walkthrough: a numbered list, one entry per screen.
2. Findings: a table sorted by severity with the five columns above.
3. Fix first: five items.
4. Not reviewed, and questions for user testing.