design

Critique rendered artifacts against intended design and update design contracts.

13|3|Updated Mar 2, 2026

Search Tags:#design #a11y #design-system #critique #polish #ui-evaluation

Ready to run

npx skills add https://github.com/misty-step/harness-kit --skill design-misty-step

💬 Prompt for ChatGPT / Claude Chat▼

Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: design
Source: https://github.com/misty-step/harness-kit/tree/main/skills/design
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/misty-step/harness-kit --skill design-misty-step

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

This section helps teams evaluate and improve rendered UI artifacts to ensure alignment with intended design goals, evidence, and governance.

Core Features & Use Cases

Evidence-based critique: inspect artifacts, identify design issues, and produce ranked, concrete changes grounded in design principles.
Design governance: generate and maintain repo-local contracts (DESIGN.md and design-contract.md) to codify visual language and decision rationale.
Workflow coverage: supports audit, polish, redesign, scaffold, and lab-registry style exploration for recurring surfaces.
Reference-grounded critique: leverages the project's design-system, anti-slop rules, and external references to shape recommendations.

Quick Start

Provide the artifact URL or screenshot and your design intent for an immediate critique.

Frequently Asked Questions about design

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema

How do I critique a UI artifact against my intended design?▼

To critique a UI artifact, provide its URL or screenshot alongside your design intent. The process inspects evidence, states design reads, proposes ranked concrete changes, and updates repo contracts like DESIGN.md to enforce alignment.

What is a design governance contract and when do I need it?▼

A design governance contract codifies visual language and decision rationale in repo-local files like design-contract.md. You need it when performing audits or polish passes to ensure rendered interfaces align with established design-system rules.

Can I use design-system references for a scaffold-grade UI evaluation?▼

Yes, scaffold-grade UI evaluation leverages project design-system references and anti-slop rules to shape recommendations. It inspects rendered artifacts, identifies design issues, and produces concrete changes grounded in evidence-based critique.

What's the best way to run a polish pass on a rendered interface?▼

The best way to run a polish pass is to name the artifact, articulate intent, and inspect evidence. This structured process generates ranked, concrete changes grounded in design principles and updates repo-local contracts for governance.

Does the critique process support redesign exploration across multiple surfaces?▼

Yes, the critique process supports redesign exploration across surfaces, documents, and interfaces. It applies lab-registry style exploration to evaluate recurring surfaces and generate concrete changes aligned with design intent.

Why do I need to articulate design intent before evaluating an artifact?▼

Articulating design intent before evaluating an artifact ensures the critique is grounded in your specific goals. This allows the process to accurately inspect evidence and propose ranked changes that align the rendered output with the intended design.