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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.