with one click
wireframe-to-spec
// [Frontend] Use when you need to convert hand-drawn wireframes, digital wireframes, or UI sketches into structured design specifications.
// [Frontend] Use when you need to convert hand-drawn wireframes, digital wireframes, or UI sketches into structured design specifications.
[HINT] Download the complete skill directory including SKILL.md and all related files
| name | wireframe-to-spec |
| description | [Frontend] Use when you need to convert hand-drawn wireframes, digital wireframes, or UI sketches into structured design specifications. |
Codex compatibility note:
- Invoke repository skills with
$skill-namein Codex; this mirrored copy rewrites legacy Claude/skill-namereferences.- Prefer the
plan-hardskill for planning guidance in this Codex mirror.- Task tracker mandate: BEFORE executing any workflow or skill step, create/update task tracking for all steps and keep it synchronized as progress changes.
- User-question prompts mean to ask the user directly in Codex.
- Ignore Claude-specific mode-switch instructions when they appear.
- Strict execution contract: when a user explicitly invokes a skill, execute that skill protocol as written.
- Subagent authorization: when a skill is user-invoked or AI-detected and its protocol requires subagents, that skill activation authorizes use of the required
spawn_agentsubagent(s) for that task.- Do not skip, reorder, or merge protocol steps unless the user explicitly approves the deviation first.
- For workflow skills, execute each listed child-skill step explicitly and report step-by-step evidence.
- If a required step/tool cannot run in this environment, stop and ask the user before adapting.
Codex does not receive Claude hook-based doc injection. When coding, planning, debugging, testing, or reviewing, open project docs explicitly using this routing.
Always read:
docs/project-config.json (project-specific paths, commands, modules, and workflow/test settings)docs/project-reference/docs-index-reference.md (routes to the full docs/project-reference/* catalog)docs/project-reference/lessons.md (always-on guardrails and anti-patterns)Situation-based docs:
backend-patterns-reference.md, domain-entities-reference.md, project-structure-reference.mdfrontend-patterns-reference.md, scss-styling-guide.md, design-system/README.mdfeature-docs-reference.mdintegration-test-reference.mde2e-test-reference.mdcode-review-rules.md plus domain docs above based on changed filesDo not read all docs blindly. Start from docs-index-reference.md, then open only relevant files for the task.
Goal: Bridge image inputs (wireframes, sketches) to structured UI specifications.
Workflow:
ai-multimodal with wireframe-specific promptsui-wireframe-protocol.md## UI Layout section or standalone spec fileKey Rules:
When this task involves frontend or UI changes,
Component patterns: docs/project-reference/frontend-patterns-reference.md (read directly when relevant; do not rely on hook-injected conversation text)
Styling/BEM guide: docs/project-reference/scss-styling-guide.md
Design system tokens: docs/project-reference/design-system/README.md
Always require human review — wireframe analysis is 70-80% accurate
Route to other skills when appropriate (Figma URL → figma-design, app screenshot → design-screenshot)
| Input | Detection | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Hand-drawn sketch photo | Image with rough/organic lines | Analyze with wireframe prompts |
| Digital wireframe | Image with clean lines/shapes | Analyze with wireframe prompts |
| Wireframe tool export | Image from Excalidraw/Balsamiq/MockFlow | Analyze with wireframe prompts |
| Figma URL | figma.com in text | Route to $figma-design instead |
| App screenshot | Polished UI with real data | Route to $design-screenshot instead |
Use ai-multimodal with these prompts:
"Analyze this wireframe image. Identify: (1) page layout regions (header, sidebar, main, footer), (2) all UI elements with approximate position and type (button, input, table, card, dropdown, modal, tabs), (3) content hierarchy (what is primary vs secondary), (4) interactive elements, (5) any text labels or annotations, (6) navigation patterns."
"From the wireframe, list every distinct UI component. For each: name it descriptively, classify its complexity (primitive=single element, composite=grouped elements, section=page region), note its purpose."
After image analysis, generate output per ui-wireframe-protocol.md:
Output as ## UI Layout section compatible with PBI/story templates.
Output as team-artifacts/design-specs/{YYMMDD}-wireframe-spec-{slug}.md
[IMPORTANT] Use task tracking to break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting.
UI System Context — For ANY task touching
.ts,.html,.scss, or.cssfiles:MUST ATTENTION READ before implementing:
docs/project-reference/frontend-patterns-reference.md— component base classes, stores, formsdocs/project-reference/scss-styling-guide.md— BEM methodology, SCSS variables, mixins, responsivedocs/project-reference/design-system/README.md— design tokens, component inventory, iconsReference
docs/project-config.jsonfor project-specific paths.
UI Wireframe Protocol — Wireframe-to-implementation flow: (1) Process design input (Figma/screenshot/sketch via ai-multimodal). (2) Create ASCII wireframe with box-drawing chars. (3) Build component inventory with tier classification (Common/Domain-Shared/Page). (4) Document states (Default/Loading/Empty/Error). (5) Map to design tokens. (6) Define responsive breakpoints. Search existing component libraries before creating new. Progressive detail by skill level (idea=sketch, story=full tree+specs).
Critical Thinking Mindset — Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination.
AI Mistake Prevention — Failure modes to avoid on every task:
Check downstream references before deleting. Deleting components causes documentation and code staleness cascades. Map all referencing files before removal. Verify AI-generated content against actual code. AI hallucinates APIs, class names, and method signatures. Always grep to confirm existence before documenting or referencing. Trace full dependency chain after edits. Changing a definition misses downstream variables and consumers derived from it. Always trace the full chain. Trace ALL code paths when verifying correctness. Confirming code exists is not confirming it executes. Always trace early exits, error branches, and conditional skips — not just happy path. When debugging, ask "whose responsibility?" before fixing. Trace whether bug is in caller (wrong data) or callee (wrong handling). Fix at responsible layer — never patch symptom site. Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing. Before changing any constant, limit, flag, or pattern: read comments, check git blame, examine surrounding code. Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first. Changes touching multiple stacks require verifying EVERY output. One green check is not all green checks. Holistic-first debugging — resist nearest-attention trap. When investigating any failure, list EVERY precondition first (config, env vars, DB names, endpoints, DI registrations, data preconditions), then verify each against evidence before forming any code-layer hypothesis. Surgical changes — apply the diff test. Bug fix: every changed line must trace directly to the bug. Don't restyle or improve adjacent code. Enhancement task: implement improvements AND announce them explicitly. Surface ambiguity before coding — don't pick silently. If request has multiple interpretations, present each with effort estimate and ask. Never assume all-records, file-based, or more complex path.
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION read frontend pattern docs, SCSS guide, and design system tokens BEFORE any UI implementation.
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION follow wireframe protocol: ASCII wireframe, component inventory with tiers, states table, design tokens, responsive breakpoints.
MUST ATTENTION apply critical thinking — every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact.
MUST ATTENTION apply AI mistake prevention — holistic-first debugging, fix at responsible layer, surface ambiguity before coding, re-read files after compaction.
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using task tracking BEFORE starting
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search codebase for 3+ similar patterns before creating new code
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite file:line evidence for every claim (confidence >80% to act)
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final review todo task to verify work quality
MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION READ the following files before starting:
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION READ CLAUDE.md before starting
[TASK-PLANNING] Before acting, analyze task scope and systematically break it into small todo tasks and sub-tasks using task tracking.
Source: .claude/hooks/lib/prompt-injections.cjs + .claude/.ck.json
$workflow-start <workflowId> for standard; sequence custom steps manually[CRITICAL] Hard-won project debugging/architecture rules. MUST ATTENTION apply BEFORE forming hypothesis or writing code.
Goal: Prevent recurrence of known failure patterns — debugging, architecture, naming, AI orchestration, environment.
Top Rules (apply always):
ExecuteInjectScopedAsync for parallel async + repo/UoW — NEVER ExecuteUowTaskwhere python/where py) — NEVER assume python/python3 resolvesExecuteInjectScopedAsync, NEVER ExecuteUowTask. ExecuteUowTask creates new UoW but reuses outer DI scope (same DbContext) — parallel iterations sharing non-thread-safe DbContext silently corrupt data. ExecuteInjectScopedAsync creates new UoW + new DI scope (fresh repo per iteration).AccountUserEntityEventBusMessage = Accounts owns). Core services (Accounts, Communication) are leaders. Feature services (Growth, Talents) sending to core MUST use {CoreServiceName}...RequestBusMessage — never define own event for core to consume.HrManagerOrHrOrPayrollHrOperationsPolicy names set members, not what it guards. Add role → rename = broken abstraction. Rule: names express DOES/GUARDS, not CONTAINS. Test: adding/removing member forces rename? YES = content-driven = bad → rename to purpose (e.g., HrOperationsAccessPolicy). Nuance: "Or" fine in behavioral idioms (FirstOrDefault, SuccessOrThrow) — expresses HAPPENS, not membership.python/python3 resolves — verify alias first. Python may not be in bash PATH under those names. Check: where python / where py. Prefer py (Windows Python Launcher) for one-liners, node if JS alternative exists.Test-specific lessons →
docs/project-reference/integration-test-reference.mdLessons Learned section. Production-code anti-patterns →docs/project-reference/backend-patterns-reference.mdAnti-Patterns section. Generic debugging/refactoring reminders → System Lessons in.claude/hooks/lib/prompt-injections.cjs.
ExecuteInjectScopedAsync, NEVER ExecuteUowTask (shared DbContext = silent data corruption){CoreServiceName}...RequestBusMessagepython/python3 resolves — run where python/where py first, use py launcher or nodeBreak work into small tasks (task tracking) before starting. Add final task: "Analyze AI mistakes & lessons learned".
Extract lessons — ROOT CAUSE ONLY, not symptom fixes:
$learn.$code-review/$code-simplifier/$security/$lint catch this?" — Yes → improve review skill instead.$learn.
[TASK-PLANNING] [MANDATORY] BEFORE executing any workflow or skill step, create/update task tracking for all planned steps, then keep it synchronized as each step starts/completes.