원클릭으로
paul-rand
Paul Rand lens — Concept. Does the design communicate an idea? Is there wit and simplicity behind the form? Read-only diagnostic.
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
메뉴
Paul Rand lens — Concept. Does the design communicate an idea? Is there wit and simplicity behind the form? Read-only diagnostic.
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
SOC 직업 분류 기준
Context-aware story extraction. Loads the maker's full context — identity, expertise, voice, published work — then reads the narrative architecture to understand the story being told and what's missing. Interviews the maker to fill gaps with real moments. Modular: works with any project.
Evaluate the IP constellation — dispatches baseline checks, then 9 lenses in parallel (Millman, Bierut, Appleton, Shaw, Peers, Victore, The Walk, The Walls). Coordinator skill.
Cross-page coherence. Do the three tiers form a coherent argument when read as a sequence? Read-only diagnostic.
Baseline checks — mechanical health of the constellation. Links, images, cross-refs, attribution, voice violations, SEO, tooltips. Read-only diagnostic.
Where lenses agree and disagree. Maps consensus vs. contradiction across audit results. Read-only diagnostic.
Copy verification checklist — 13-item pass/fail check on draft or published copy. Voice rules, grounding, Shaw check, steward voice. Read-only diagnostic.
| name | paul-rand |
| description | Paul Rand lens — Concept. Does the design communicate an idea? Is there wit and simplicity behind the form? Read-only diagnostic. |
| user_invocable | true |
Paul Rand's standard: design is the method of putting form and content together. Not arrangement. Not decoration. An idea. The best design communicates a concept so simply that wit and clarity become the same thing. This lens evaluates whether the visual design has a concept behind it, or whether it is merely organized elements.
Read-only diagnostic. Reports a verdict, never auto-fixes.
/paul-rand # Evaluate full site screenshots
/paul-rand [page-name] # Evaluate a specific page's screenshot
.audit/screenshots/ (latest set) — REQUIRED. Never evaluate from source code alone.docs/visual-reference-index.md → active reference set.audit/rubric.md if it exists/print-craft → material quality baseline → PRESSED/ADEQUATE/DIGITAL (for texture-related questions)The evaluation questions below ARE this lens's criteria.
Before evaluating ANY question below, use the Read tool to view the screenshot images provided in your prompt. Claude can read PNG files — the Read tool returns visual content.
Read each screenshot path provided. Base ALL evaluations on what you SEE in the screenshots, not on source code, CSS, or documentation. If no screenshot paths were provided, state "NO SCREENSHOTS PROVIDED — cannot evaluate" and stop.
Do NOT fall back to reading SCSS, CSS, or HTML files. The evaluation is of the RENDERED output, not the source.
For each screenshot (or the set as a whole), ask:
Look at the overall composition. Is the layout driven by an idea — a visual argument, a structural metaphor, a deliberate tension — or is it elements placed according to convention? Rand's IBM posters weren't "nicely arranged" — each one communicated a single idea through form. Does this design do the same?
Before reading any text, what does the design itself say? Is there a message in the composition, the hierarchy, the relationship between elements? Or does the design only become meaningful once you read the words? The form should carry meaning independent of the content it holds.
Rand's rebus logos, his playful geometry — the wit always made the idea clearer, never competed with it. Look for moments where the design does something unexpected that makes the communication sharper. Flag cleverness that exists for its own sake or decoration that masquerades as concept.
The mark of Rand's work: what looks simple is actually holding together something complex. A single symbol that contains an entire corporate identity. A poster that reduces a message to its irreducible form. Does this design achieve that compression — complexity made simple through design — or is it simple because it is merely thin?
Print in conversation. No file changes. Format:
# Paul Rand Lens — "Concept."
## Overall: [CONCEPTUAL / FUNCTIONAL / EMPTY]
**R1. Concept or arrangement?** — [verdict]
[Evidence from screenshots.]
**R2. Idea on first contact?** — [verdict]
[Evidence from screenshots.]
**R3. Wit serving clarity?** — [verdict]
[Evidence from screenshots.]
**R4. Simplicity carrying complexity?** — [verdict]
[Evidence from screenshots.]
## The Idea
[One sentence: what concept, if any, is the design communicating?]
For each non-passing question, state:
Claude's visual assessment, not expert critique. Useful as structured feedback, not authoritative judgment.
/design-review coordinator — runs in parallel with other visual lenses