ui-screenshot-to-storybook-product

name	ui-screenshot-to-storybook-product
description	Turn screenshots or Figma exports into token-backed Storybook components and composed product screens.

UI Screenshot -> Storybook -> Product

Use this workflow when the workspace is driven by screenshots in reference/, or by Figma when .env.local is configured.

Inputs

• One or more screenshots in reference/
• Optional Figma configuration in .env.local
• Product requirements in product/
• Accuracy contract in start-here/ACCURACY_CONTRACT.md

Accuracy contract

Before implementation, classify the source mode:

• Figma-first: highest-fidelity path because the workflow can use structured layout, variables, components, and selected frame context.
• Multi-reference screenshot: good visual reconstruction when repeated patterns and breakpoints are visible, but component boundaries and hidden states still need confirmation.
• Single-image: first-pass approximation only. Record observed facts, inferred decisions, missing context, and open questions before coding.

Do not present a single image as a complete product specification. If only one image is available, ask for or record the target viewport, product purpose, key states, real data assumptions, responsive behavior, brand assets, and acceptance threshold.

Figma-first mode

If .env.local contains FIGMA_FILE_URL and FIGMA_NODE_ID but has neither FIGMA_PAT nor FIGMA_AUTH_MODE=connector, stop and ask the user to set FIGMA_PAT in .env.local, or set FIGMA_AUTH_MODE=connector when the tool already has authenticated Figma MCP/connector access, before continuing with Figma-first automation.

If .env.local contains the Figma URL and node plus either FIGMA_PAT or FIGMA_AUTH_MODE=connector:

1. Read Figma design context.
2. Read Figma variables.
3. Build a component inventory from the selected node.
4. Treat Figma as the source of truth.
5. Use reference/ screenshots only as secondary visual validation.

Phase A: design-system analysis

Before code, produce:

• source mode classification from start-here/ACCURACY_CONTRACT.md
• image-only assumption log when Figma context is unavailable
• An evidence log covering recurring signals in:
  • color proportion and saturation placement
  • spacing feel and density
  • corner/radius treatment
  • typography weight and hierarchy
• A set of 5-7 design principles with:
  • source evidence
  • interpretation
  • design rule
  • token impact
• A design-elements definition that includes:
  • color system: recommended primary, secondary, and background/surface Hex values with rationale
  • typography: 1-2 open-source font recommendations, preferably Google Fonts, with rationale
  • shape and corner: default border-radius strategy and visual tone
  • spacing and layout: base grid recommendation such as 4px or 8px, plus overall density mode
• A note on what is observed, what is inferred, and what is an intentional exception

If references disagree, identify the dominant pattern and document the exceptions instead of averaging everything together.

Use this exact response structure for Phase A:

1. Signal Summary

Dimension	Observed pattern	Confidence	Notes
Color proportion		high / medium / low
Spacing feel		high / medium / low
Corner size		high / medium / low
Typography weight		high / medium / low
Hierarchy contrast		high / medium / low

2. Design Principles

Principle	Source evidence	Interpretation	Design rule	Token impact
1
2
3
4
5

Add rows 6-7 only when justified by real repeated patterns.

3. Design Elements

Element	Recommendation	Why it fits the principles	Token direction
Primary color	#		--sys-color-*
Secondary color	#		--sys-color-*
Background/surface color	#		--sys-color-*
Typography family			--sys-font-*
Typography weight strategy			--sys-font-weight-*
Corner strategy			--sys-radius-*
Base spacing grid			--sys-space-*
Layout density			spacing and layout tokens

4. Observed vs Inferred

Item	Type	Detail	Reason
1	observed / inferred / exception
2	observed / inferred / exception
3	observed / inferred / exception

Do not write code yet.

Phase B: visual inventory

After the design-system analysis, produce:

| Block | Purpose | Visual cues | Candidate component owner | Token roles |

Do not write code yet.

Phase C: reuse and architecture

For each block:

• search existing shared UI
• decide reuse, extend, or create new
• list expected stories and states

Output:

| Component | Responsibility | Screens | Decision |

Phase D: Storybook-first implementation

Create or update shared UI before screen files:

• install or upgrade to the latest stable Storybook 10 when Storybook is not ready yet
• component
• co-located story
• Autodocs-enabled story metadata
• component descriptions in Storybook docs output
• prop documentation through argTypes plus expanded controls
• representative states and variants
• maintain design/foundations/*.md as the written source for principles, specs, and token usage
• foundations pages when token work changes, using a designed bento-style layout instead of raw token dumps

Phase E: screen composition

Assemble screens from documented exports only.

Phase F: parity check

Run the compare workflow before calling the screen done.

The parity loop must:

1. Capture or identify the source baseline.
2. Compare generated output against the source viewport.
3. Fix drift in ownership order: token/theme, primitive/shared component, component variant/props, composition/layout, page-only styling.
4. Record remaining variance as accepted, deferred, or blocked by missing context.

Constraints

• No token bypass.
• No skipping the design-system analysis when the source is new or materially changed.
• No one-off page styling when a shared owner exists.
• No final screen implementation before reusable story coverage.
• No reusable component story without Autodocs and a component description.
• No reusable component story without documented consumer-facing props in argTypes.
• No token-system change without updating the related foundation guide or foundations page.
• No image-only implementation without an observed / inferred / missing context log.
• No sign-off claim of exact parity when remaining variance has not been recorded.