Design Review

• Check how similar tools solve the same problem before inventing a pattern.
• Use proven references when they exist.
• Quality bar references:
  • UX Tools — editorial restraint, typography, calm hierarchy
  • Inflight by Ridd — motion, depth, data viz polish
  • Linear — dense information, excellent hierarchy, no noise
  • Vercel dashboard — spacing, typography, dark mode discipline

3. Check design memory

• Read memory/channels/{channel-name}.md for prior design decisions.
• If memory says Aaron rejected a pattern, don't repeat it.
• If a project brain file is linked from channel memory, read that too.

Aaron's Core Principles

• Restraint IS the design.
• Spacing is the #1 tell.
• Typography hierarchy > color for information architecture.
• Match references at pixel level before adding your own ideas.
• Existing patterns > new patterns.
• Interactive elements should feel polished, not dead.
• If the foundation is wrong, no polish fixes it.
• Good design is centripetal, not centrifugal.

Reference Files

Read only what the task needs. Keep this SKILL lean, load detail on demand:

• references/typography.md — hierarchy, scale, pairing, measure
• references/color.md — restrained palettes, tinted neutrals, contrast, OKLCH
• references/spacing.md — spacing system, rhythm, grouping, layout density
• references/motion.md — timing, easing, reduced motion, interactive feel
• references/anti-patterns.md — patterns Aaron will clock instantly and reject

For sub-agents

• Read the relevant reference files based on what you're building.
• New layout or dashboard? Read spacing + anti-patterns.
• Type-heavy screen? Read typography + spacing.
• Color or theming work? Read color + anti-patterns.
• Interactive polish? Read motion + anti-patterns.
• If in doubt, at minimum read spacing + anti-patterns.

Pre-Flight Checklist

Run this EVERY TIME before presenting work to Aaron.

Step 1: Visual verification

• Take a screenshot of the rendered result.
• Compare side-by-side with the reference if one exists.
• Check the target viewport, not an arbitrary devtools width.

Step 2: Design audit

• Spacing check — enough breathing room? Default to more.
• Color check — did you add color that wasn't necessary?
• Typography check — is hierarchy clear without leaning on color?
• Pattern check — are you using the project's existing components?
• Interaction check — hover, focus, active states exist and feel intentional.
• Integrity check — no placeholders, dead states, broken assets, or missing data handling.

Step 3: Honesty check

• Is it actually done?
• Does it meet the brief, not an adjacent brief?
• Would you be proud to show this to Aaron cold?

Step 4: Run verification scripts

if you have access to the scripts directory, run these before presenting:

# check for common agent anti-patterns
python3 skills/design-review/scripts/anti-pattern-check.py <your-file.tsx>

# verify loading, empty, and error states exist
python3 skills/design-review/scripts/state-check.py <your-file.tsx>

# check semantic HTML, aria labels, alt text, heading hierarchy
python3 skills/design-review/scripts/accessibility-check.py <your-file.tsx>

fix any warnings before presenting. these are the cheapest quality checks — they catch the obvious stuff so the human review can focus on judgment calls.

for CI integration, copy ci/design-eval.py and ci/design-eval.yml into your project to run all three checks on every PR.

Step 5: Present with evidence

• Screenshot of the result
• What you referenced
• Known gaps or uncertainties
• Link to live/deployed version if applicable

Updating This Skill

• After Aaron gives design feedback, capture it.
• Add redirects to references/anti-patterns.md or the relevant reference file.
• Add project-specific decisions to channel memory.
• Goal: don't get the same design feedback twice.