> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://matheus-draau.gitbook.io/solana-onboarding-kit/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://matheus-draau.gitbook.io/solana-onboarding-kit/methodology.md).

# 2. How the analysis was conducted

The evaluation adopted **Nielsen's 10 usability heuristics** ([Nielsen, 1994](https://www.nngroup.com/books/usability-engineering/)) as its protocol, but with a methodological adaptation that adds granularity: each heuristic was broken down into **3 objective questions**, totaling **30 items per application**. Each item received:

* **A verdict**: *Yes* (meets), *Partial* (meets with caveats), or *No* (does not meet);
* **A severity from 0 to 4**, calibrated by the impact on the user, not by the abstract presence of a problem:

| Severity | Meaning                                      |
| :------: | -------------------------------------------- |
|   **0**  | No problem                                   |
|   **1**  | Cosmetic                                     |
|   **2**  | Minor / friction                             |
|   **3**  | High, hinders use                            |
|   **4**  | Critical, blocks use or creates risk of loss |

Each app's final score is the **average of the 30 severities** (empty cell = 0). Every failure was further classified by **impact type**:

* **Confusion**: does not understand;
* **Friction**: extra effort;
* **Block**: cannot proceed;
* **Distrust**: loses confidence.

This distinction matters because a problem that creates distrust in a context of irreversible money costs far more than one that creates mere friction.

Aggregated across the 13 apps, these verdicts, severities, and impact types compose a **friction map**: a structured view of where onboarding breaks across the ecosystem and how severely. The next chapters read that map tier by tier and pattern by pattern.

{% hint style="warning" %}
**Scope and methodological honesty.** The focus was always the **onboarding flow**, from the first screen to the first moment of real use, and not the entire product. In some cases (Backpack, OKX), the full registration/KYC was not completed by the user; this is flagged in the individual evaluations to preserve the honesty of the method. This report is also deliberately limited to the heuristic analysis: complementary interviews and a user survey were planned but set aside after low audience uptake, so rather than lean on thin or unrepresentative data, the synthesis rests entirely on the structured heuristic evaluation.
{% endhint %}

***

➡️ Continue to [**3. The overall landscape**](/solana-onboarding-kit/landscape.md).


---

# Agent Instructions
This documentation is published with GitBook. GitBook is the documentation platform designed so that both humans and AI agents can read, navigate, and reason over technical content effectively. Learn more at gitbook.com.

## Querying This Documentation
If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question.

Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter, and the optional `goal` query parameter:

```
GET https://matheus-draau.gitbook.io/solana-onboarding-kit/methodology.md?ask=<question>&goal=<endgoal>
```

`ask` is the immediate question: it should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language.
`goal` is optional and describes the broader end goal you are ultimately trying to accomplish on behalf of the user. GitBook uses it to tailor the answer towards what is most useful for that goal.

The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation.

Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.