visual-review

Visual review evaluates customer-facing surfaces by analyzing interaction evidence from UI, engineering, and QA artifacts. It grounds subjective design decisions in observable data to identify user-visible issues early across web, mobile, and CLI touchpoints.

Yes, performing a visual surface diff requires project tooling like Playwright and route fixtures. You also need a defined surface register and a taxonomy of design-language handles to guide the evaluation and produce actionable adjustments.

Yes, you can apply design-language guidance to CLI and TUI surfaces. The visual review process evaluates consistency across web, mobile, CLI, and generated reports to ensure cross-context coverage and identify interaction flow gaps.

The best way to turn subjective UI feedback into evidence-driven guidance is applying a taxonomy of handles like hierarchy, density, rhythm, and negative space. This grounds visual review findings in observable artifacts for actionable tweaks.

Without a defined surface register, visual review cannot systematically analyze user-visible surfaces or produce evidence-backed findings. The process depends on this register alongside project tooling to accurately surface design and engineering gaps before releases.