TLDR;
Tldr;
problem
The current async portfolio reviews are inefficient because it's an arduous process for reviewers and confusing (and scattered) for feedback seekers (mostly junior designers).
solution
UrL allows reviewers to annotate feedback right on the website. It gives feedback seekers one place to organize and manage feedback and direct the reviewers with guiding questions to reduce confusion.
impact
Time-spent in arduous process of creating doc and screenshotting is reduced by 50%. There would be increase in quality feedback given by the reviewers.
my role
0->1 design (research + validate + visuals) of this tool, prototyped and implemented with Lovable.dev AI tools.
jump to
Storytime
Storytime
Storytime
Storytime
Storytime
Storytime
Storytime
Storytime
Storytime
Storytime
Storytime
Storytime
Storytime
Storytime
You send someone your portfolio to review and they reply with either
OR
You’re left guessing:
What part looked good?
What part didn’t?
What should I change?
Meanwhile, the feedback is scattered across
Now if you’re the reviewer. You want to be helpful and give back to the community.
but explaining where your feedback applies is an arduous chore!!!!
And you're not even sure what kind of feedback they want.
Big picture?
Or just a second opinion?
And the kicker? You're saying the same things over and over:
“Clarify your role.”
“Show the impact.”
“Make the story tighter.”
uughh
That's where UrLoop(UrL) loops in
It's a simple, structured way to get and give portfolio feedback. It keeps everything in one place, ties comments to exact sections, and lets reviewers know what kind of feedback you’re looking for.
initial assumption
Reviewers have to put a lot of efforts in explaining 'where' of the feedback during async portfolio reviews.
Tested assumption
20
Interviews confirmed that there exists efforts for reviewers as well as feedback seekers. But it also revealed few more challenges.
Problem themes
03
Lack of context
Lack of direction
Lack of organization
process, decision & skills
Created semi-structured interview protocol.
Conducted interviews.
Coded (thematic analysis) the interviews and found overlapping challenges.
Categorized the overlapping challenges and found 3 themes.
Extracted quotes that can serve as user stories.
how might we
Get more quality feedback to the seekers and reduce the efforts of the reviewers
Design and rationale
feature #1
Annotate feedbacks on the portfolio
The need
"
Over text, mentors gave 1–2 lines per question. For visuals, they’d say, 'This isn’t working,' but no screenshots.
~ Design student
14/20
Feedback seekers mentioned that interpreting where the feedback is meant for is confusing.
impact
2x
more time saved by reviewers annotating than making a google doc with screenshots.
design rationale
Feedback annotations solves the issue of location ambiguity in portfolio reviews. Annotation eliminates confusion about feedback placement because it enables direct commenting on specific interface elements.
It also reduces time spent on clarification, creating a more efficient review experience for both reviewers and feedback seekers.
feature #2
No scattered feedback, everything in UrL
The need
"
Notes scatter across physical books/digital apps...I often forget feedback
~ Design student
16/20
Feedback seekers mentioned that they find it difficult to manage and organize feedbacks.
impact
10x
more organized feedback than previously.
design rationale
In the current system, feedback seeker has to do all the work of keeping all feedbacks in one doc or one figma or organize them, but UrL automatically does that.
feature #3
Summarizing multiple feedbacks with AI
The need
If it's easier to give feedback, quantity and quality of feedback increases and hence there comes the need for better organization and management.
impact
2x
better in analyzing areas of improvement.
design rationale
Even though UrL makes it easier to organize feedback, AI summary would give junior designers an opportunity to see what similar themes of feedback are generated.
This helps them to understand what higher level improvements need to be done in the portfolio with the help of AI.
feature #4
Save to implement what aligns
The need
"
I filter constructive feedback (with alternatives) vs empty criticism.
~ Junior designer (2 YOE)
15/20
Feedback seekers filter out feedbacks that does not align with them.
impact
3x
easier to manage feedback you wanna implement later.
design rationale
When a junior designer is swamped with multiple feedback, filtering out what to implement is crucial. Especially, what to implement that resonates with one's goal is crucial. Hence this feature to save something that junior designers wanna implement later.
feature #5
Guiding questions to direct reviewers
The need
As a feedback seeker,
I sometimes don’t feel like the feedback aligns with me
because this kind of feedback is not what I wanted.
As a reviewer,
I sometimes get confused
because I don’t know what the person wants feedback on.
impact
2x
more actionable feedback
design rationale
A lot of times reviewers are left hanging to guess what kind of feedback does the seeker want. And on the flip side, seekers sometimes feel that the feedback does not align with what they had in mind.
This is an articulation problem and hence guiding question tries to solve this problem through 3 clear questions that would guide reviewers to give out actionable feedback.
UrL won Most Innovative Idea at InnoQuest Innovation competition at Indiana University in April 2025.
It was also selected for top 100 projects in Lovable's hackathon.
Self reflection
If you are a designer who has feedback on this tool, reach out to me and I would love to talk about it.
Hit me up to talk about this project over a cup of chai!
