Judge Prototype Complexity by Numbers, Not Gut Feel
Interactive prototypes get exponentially harder to review and maintain as screen count, interactions, and branching flows grow. Yet most teams schedule reviews based on a vague "this feels complex" impression, and reviews end up taking far longer than planned.
This evaluator scores complexity using screens + (screens × interactions per screen × 0.3) + (flows × 5). Screen count reflects base scale, interactions reflect detail per screen, and flow count reflects the diversity of branching paths.
What Each Level Means
A score under 20 means one person can quickly grasp the whole flow. From 20-50, a pair review helps catch what a solo reviewer might miss. Above 50, no single person can realistically review every branch, so a team workshop is needed. Past 100, split the team by flow and review in parallel.
Using the Time Estimate
The estimated review time is only a rough guide, but it's useful for gauging how much time to allocate for review within a sprint schedule.
Frequently Asked Questions
High complexity means longer review and QA time. Knowing it ahead lets you plan a realistic method and schedule.
Low complexity suits solo review, medium suits pair review, and very high complexity needs a team workshop to catch missed flows.