Design Skill
Use $design when product, UI/UX, frontend, or design-system decisions need a durable source of truth in the repository. This skill discovers existing design context, interviews for missing product/design information, and creates or refreshes repo-local DESIGN.md so future UI/UX/frontend work is grounded instead of improvised.
Purpose
Make repo-local DESIGN.md source of truth and canonical design contract for the current repository:
existing repo evidence -> missing-context interview -> create/refresh DESIGN.md -> use DESIGN.md for UI/UX/frontend decisions.
The output is not a pixel-matching loop and not a one-off visual critique. It is the maintained design brief/checklist that implementation, review, and future visual work should cite.
Use when
- The user asks for design direction, UX guidance, frontend planning, or design-system alignment.
- A repo needs a design brief before UI/frontend implementation begins.
- Existing UI/components/assets/screenshots need to be summarized into a reusable design source of truth.
- UI/UX/frontend decisions are ambiguous and should be resolved through product context, constraints, and documented principles.
- A feature needs
DESIGN.md created or refreshed before $ralph, a designer lane, or implementation work proceeds.
Do not use when
- The user provides or requests a visual reference/image/live URL and wants measured implementation until screenshots match. Use
$visual-ralph for that visual-reference implementation loop.
- The task is pure backend/API/infrastructure work with no user-facing design consequence.
- The user only asks to compare screenshots or score visual fidelity. Use
$visual-ralph and its built-in visual verdict flow.
Relationship to $visual-ralph
$design owns the durable repo design source of truth: product goals, users, IA, visual language, components, accessibility, constraints, and open questions in DESIGN.md.
$visual-ralph owns implementation against an approved generated/static/live-URL visual reference, with screenshot capture, Visual Ralph verdict scoring, and pixel-diff evidence. $visual-ralph may read DESIGN.md, and it may leave design-system artifacts behind, but it does not replace the DESIGN.md discovery/interview/refresh workflow.
If both are needed, run $design first to establish the design contract, then run $visual-ralph only after the visual reference/baseline is approved.
Workflow
1. Discover local design evidence
Inspect the repository before writing guidance. Look for:
DESIGN.md, docs/design*, docs/ux*, docs/frontend*, README.md, product specs, PRDs, and issue notes.
- Existing UI source: routes, pages, layouts, components, stories, examples, demos, theme files, CSS variables, Tailwind/theme config, tokens, icons, and assets.
- Screenshots, mockups, brand files, logos, Figma/export notes, Storybook snapshots, Playwright screenshots, visual-regression baselines, or
.omx/artifacts/visual-ralph/* references.
- Accessibility, responsive, i18n, content, and platform constraints already encoded in code or docs.
Record evidence with file paths. Distinguish observed facts from design inferences.
2. Interview only for missing context
Ask concise questions only when repo evidence cannot answer design-critical context. Prefer one focused round that closes the biggest gaps, such as:
- target users/personas and jobs to be done,
- product/business goals and non-goals,
- brand personality or forbidden aesthetics,
- primary flows and information architecture,
- accessibility level, device/browser support, and implementation constraints,
- existing design assets or references the repo does not contain.
If the user wants autonomous progress or cannot answer, create DESIGN.md with explicit assumptions and open questions instead of blocking.
3. Create or refresh DESIGN.md
Use the structure below. Preserve useful existing content, remove contradictions, and mark unknowns as open questions. Keep it actionable for implementers and reviewers.
Required DESIGN.md structure/checklist
# Design
## Source of truth
- Status: Draft | Active | Needs refresh
- Last refreshed: YYYY-MM-DD
- Primary product surfaces:
- Evidence reviewed:
## Brand
- Personality:
- Trust signals:
- Avoid:
## Product goals
- Goals:
- Non-goals:
- Success signals:
## Personas and jobs
- Primary personas:
- User jobs:
- Key contexts of use:
## Information architecture
- Primary navigation:
- Core routes/screens:
- Content hierarchy:
## Design principles
- Principle 1:
- Principle 2:
- Tradeoffs:
## Visual language
- Color:
- Typography:
- Spacing/layout rhythm:
- Shape/radius/elevation:
- Motion:
- Imagery/iconography:
## Components
- Existing components to reuse:
- New/changed components:
- Variants and states:
- Token/component ownership:
## Accessibility
- Target standard:
- Keyboard/focus behavior:
- Contrast/readability:
- Screen-reader semantics:
- Reduced motion and sensory considerations:
## Responsive behavior
- Supported breakpoints/devices:
- Layout adaptations:
- Touch/hover differences:
## Interaction states
- Loading:
- Empty:
- Error:
- Success:
- Disabled:
- Offline/slow network, if applicable:
## Content voice
- Tone:
- Terminology:
- Microcopy rules:
## Implementation constraints
- Framework/styling system:
- Design-token constraints:
- Performance constraints:
- Compatibility constraints:
- Test/screenshot expectations:
## Open questions
- [ ] Question / owner / impact
4. Use DESIGN.md as the decision contract
For UI/UX/frontend work after the refresh:
- Cite the relevant
DESIGN.md sections before making design choices.
- Prefer existing components, tokens, and documented constraints.
- If implementation reveals a design contradiction, update
DESIGN.md or add an open question before proceeding.
- Do not introduce a new design-system layer when existing repo-native patterns can be extended.
5. Handoff to implementation or Visual Ralph when appropriate
- For normal frontend implementation, hand off with the relevant
DESIGN.md sections, repo evidence, and acceptance criteria.
- For visual-reference/image/live-URL matching, hand off to
$visual-ralph with the approved reference/baseline and note that DESIGN.md is supporting context, not the visual verdict target.
Completion checklist
Do not declare the design workflow complete until:
- Existing design docs/assets/components/screenshots have been inspected or explicitly noted as absent.
- Missing product/design context has been answered, assumed, or listed in
DESIGN.md open questions.
DESIGN.md exists at the repo root and contains all required checklist sections.
- UI/UX/frontend recommendations cite
DESIGN.md rather than relying on unstated preferences.
- Any
$visual-ralph handoff is clearly separated as visual implementation matching, not DESIGN.md governance.
Task: {{ARGUMENTS}}
1---2name: design3description: [OMX] Canonical repo-local DESIGN.md workflow for product, UI/UX, and frontend decision source of truth4---56# Design Skill78Use `$design` when product, UI/UX, frontend, or design-system decisions need a durable source of truth in the repository. This skill discovers existing design context, interviews for missing product/design information, and creates or refreshes repo-local `DESIGN.md` so future UI/UX/frontend work is grounded instead of improvised.910## Purpose1112Make repo-local `DESIGN.md` source of truth and canonical design contract for the current repository:1314`existing repo evidence -> missing-context interview -> create/refresh DESIGN.md -> use DESIGN.md for UI/UX/frontend decisions`.1516The output is not a pixel-matching loop and not a one-off visual critique. It is the maintained design brief/checklist that implementation, review, and future visual work should cite.1718## Use when1920- The user asks for design direction, UX guidance, frontend planning, or design-system alignment.21- A repo needs a design brief before UI/frontend implementation begins.22- Existing UI/components/assets/screenshots need to be summarized into a reusable design source of truth.23- UI/UX/frontend decisions are ambiguous and should be resolved through product context, constraints, and documented principles.24- A feature needs `DESIGN.md` created or refreshed before `$ralph`, a designer lane, or implementation work proceeds.2526## Do not use when2728- The user provides or requests a visual reference/image/live URL and wants measured implementation until screenshots match. Use `$visual-ralph` for that visual-reference implementation loop.29- The task is pure backend/API/infrastructure work with no user-facing design consequence.30- The user only asks to compare screenshots or score visual fidelity. Use `$visual-ralph` and its built-in visual verdict flow.3132## Relationship to `$visual-ralph`3334`$design` owns the durable repo design source of truth: product goals, users, IA, visual language, components, accessibility, constraints, and open questions in `DESIGN.md`.3536`$visual-ralph` owns implementation against an approved generated/static/live-URL visual reference, with screenshot capture, Visual Ralph verdict scoring, and pixel-diff evidence. `$visual-ralph` may read `DESIGN.md`, and it may leave design-system artifacts behind, but it does not replace the `DESIGN.md` discovery/interview/refresh workflow.3738If both are needed, run `$design` first to establish the design contract, then run `$visual-ralph` only after the visual reference/baseline is approved.3940## Workflow4142### 1. Discover local design evidence4344Inspect the repository before writing guidance. Look for:4546- `DESIGN.md`, `docs/design*`, `docs/ux*`, `docs/frontend*`, `README.md`, product specs, PRDs, and issue notes.47- Existing UI source: routes, pages, layouts, components, stories, examples, demos, theme files, CSS variables, Tailwind/theme config, tokens, icons, and assets.48- Screenshots, mockups, brand files, logos, Figma/export notes, Storybook snapshots, Playwright screenshots, visual-regression baselines, or `.omx/artifacts/visual-ralph/*` references.49- Accessibility, responsive, i18n, content, and platform constraints already encoded in code or docs.5051Record evidence with file paths. Distinguish observed facts from design inferences.5253### 2. Interview only for missing context5455Ask concise questions only when repo evidence cannot answer design-critical context. Prefer one focused round that closes the biggest gaps, such as:5657- target users/personas and jobs to be done,58- product/business goals and non-goals,59- brand personality or forbidden aesthetics,60- primary flows and information architecture,61- accessibility level, device/browser support, and implementation constraints,62- existing design assets or references the repo does not contain.6364If the user wants autonomous progress or cannot answer, create `DESIGN.md` with explicit assumptions and open questions instead of blocking.6566### 3. Create or refresh `DESIGN.md`6768Use the structure below. Preserve useful existing content, remove contradictions, and mark unknowns as open questions. Keep it actionable for implementers and reviewers.6970#### Required `DESIGN.md` structure/checklist7172```markdown73# Design7475## Source of truth76- Status: Draft | Active | Needs refresh77- Last refreshed: YYYY-MM-DD78- Primary product surfaces:79- Evidence reviewed:8081## Brand82- Personality:83- Trust signals:84- Avoid:8586## Product goals87- Goals:88- Non-goals:89- Success signals:9091## Personas and jobs92- Primary personas:93- User jobs:94- Key contexts of use:9596## Information architecture97- Primary navigation:98- Core routes/screens:99- Content hierarchy:100101## Design principles102- Principle 1:103- Principle 2:104- Tradeoffs:105106## Visual language107- Color:108- Typography:109- Spacing/layout rhythm:110- Shape/radius/elevation:111- Motion:112- Imagery/iconography:113114## Components115- Existing components to reuse:116- New/changed components:117- Variants and states:118- Token/component ownership:119120## Accessibility121- Target standard:122- Keyboard/focus behavior:123- Contrast/readability:124- Screen-reader semantics:125- Reduced motion and sensory considerations:126127## Responsive behavior128- Supported breakpoints/devices:129- Layout adaptations:130- Touch/hover differences:131132## Interaction states133- Loading:134- Empty:135- Error:136- Success:137- Disabled:138- Offline/slow network, if applicable:139140## Content voice141- Tone:142- Terminology:143- Microcopy rules:144145## Implementation constraints146- Framework/styling system:147- Design-token constraints:148- Performance constraints:149- Compatibility constraints:150- Test/screenshot expectations:151152## Open questions153- [ ] Question / owner / impact154```155156### 4. Use `DESIGN.md` as the decision contract157158For UI/UX/frontend work after the refresh:159160- Cite the relevant `DESIGN.md` sections before making design choices.161- Prefer existing components, tokens, and documented constraints.162- If implementation reveals a design contradiction, update `DESIGN.md` or add an open question before proceeding.163- Do not introduce a new design-system layer when existing repo-native patterns can be extended.164165### 5. Handoff to implementation or Visual Ralph when appropriate166167- For normal frontend implementation, hand off with the relevant `DESIGN.md` sections, repo evidence, and acceptance criteria.168- For visual-reference/image/live-URL matching, hand off to `$visual-ralph` with the approved reference/baseline and note that `DESIGN.md` is supporting context, not the visual verdict target.169170## Completion checklist171172Do not declare the design workflow complete until:173174- Existing design docs/assets/components/screenshots have been inspected or explicitly noted as absent.175- Missing product/design context has been answered, assumed, or listed in `DESIGN.md` open questions.176- `DESIGN.md` exists at the repo root and contains all required checklist sections.177- UI/UX/frontend recommendations cite `DESIGN.md` rather than relying on unstated preferences.178- Any `$visual-ralph` handoff is clearly separated as visual implementation matching, not DESIGN.md governance.179180Task: {{ARGUMENTS}}