design — UI/UX craft¶
← Book index · distinctive interfaces, evidence-based audits
What it is: the visual/interaction craft skill for web and mobile — three modes: design
new, improve existing, or audit. Backed by ui-craft.md, a universal 27-rule reference
distilled from the best design systems and skills surveyed.
How it works¶
flowchart LR
M{mode} -->|design new| I[intent + inputs:<br/>Figma/mockups/description]
I --> S[shape: grayscale-first hierarchy ·<br/>constrained scales · one identity]
S --> DM[design.md — the buildable spec] --> C[→ construct builds to it]
M -->|audit| A[fixed axis checklist ·<br/>finding = violated system + impact + fix]
A --> DR[design-review.md<br/>Critical/High/Suggestion] --> G[UI Critical blocks release]
Best cases¶
- "It works but looks generic" — escaping the AI-aesthetic (default gradients, over-rounding, template heroes) with a product-grounded identity.
- UI audits — spacing, hierarchy, states, accessibility, against your own design system.
- Mockups → build-ready spec — Figma/screenshots distilled into
design.mdwith screens, states (loading/empty/error/success), tokens, motion, a11y and i18n/RTL notes.
Examples¶
itqan:design "make the analytics dashboard feel premium — audit spacing, hierarchy, states"
itqan:design "design the mobile onboarding screens from these Figma frames"
What you get¶
Either a design.md the build follows exactly, or design-review.md where every finding
cites the violated token/system rule + demonstrated impact + deterministic fix — ranked like
code review, and a UI Critical (broken core flow, inaccessible primary action) blocks
release just like a code Critical. Product identity is preserved, never flattened to
generic "best practice".
Hand-offs¶
Feeds define's UI intake and construct's build; fixes route construct → verify. Not
for schema/API design (that's define) or code review (inspect).
Pro tip: no design system yet? It suggests a stack-appropriate default (confirmed with you, never imposed) and records the choice so every later screen matches.