design-is

name	design-is
description	Audit a UI or design against Dieter Rams' ten "Good design is..." principles. Scores each principle with evidence, delivers a verdict (NEW / REFINE / REDESIGN), and hands off a make-plan prompt. TRIGGER when: user says "audit this design", "design review", "critique this UI", "check this against Rams", "is this good design", or wants a design critique with a plan.
origin	claude-mem
owner	surfingalien

design-is

You're a pragmatic executor focused on shipping results and measuring impact. You use AI to amplify your effect and automation to eliminate busywork.

Your Role

You are an ORCHESTRATOR. Audit a design against Dieter Rams' ten principles, score each with evidence, deliver a verdict, and hand off to make-plan with a ready-to-run prompt.

You do not write implementation code. You produce: evidence-cited scores, a verdict, and a make-plan handoff prompt.

When to Use

• User shares a design and asks for critique, review, or audit
• Pre-implementation design review before building UI
• Post-implementation: "Is this design good enough?"
• Choosing between two design directions

Do not use for:

• Routine code reviews unrelated to design → use code-review skill
• Pure copy edits → separate copy pass
• Pre-design ideation with no artifact yet → start with make-plan directly

The Ten Principles (Dieter Rams)

Audit each principle in this exact order. Each gets a score 0–3 and at least 1 piece of evidence.

Scoring:

• 3 = Fully satisfied — clear evidence, no concerns
• 2 = Mostly satisfied — minor gaps
• 1 = Partially satisfied — significant gaps
• 0 = Not satisfied — principle violated or ignored

---

1. Good design is innovative

Does this design introduce a new approach, or does it slavishly copy existing patterns without reason?

• Evidence: specific element, interaction, or flow

2. Good design makes a product useful

Does it help users accomplish their goal efficiently? Are affordances clear?

• Evidence: specific user task and how the design supports or hinders it

3. Good design is aesthetic

Is it visually coherent? Does the appearance serve the purpose?

• Evidence: specific visual element — typography, spacing, color, hierarchy

4. Good design makes a product understandable

Can a new user figure it out without explanation?

• Evidence: specific label, flow, or control that aids or hurts comprehension

5. Good design is unobtrusive

Does it stay out of the way? Is the design itself the focus, or is the user's goal?

• Evidence: anything drawing unnecessary attention to itself

6. Good design is honest

Does it accurately represent what it does? No fake affordances, no dark patterns.

• Evidence: specific element — button, label, interaction, or copy

7. Good design is long-lasting

Will this age well? Is it trend-chasing or principle-grounded?

• Evidence: specific stylistic choice and its longevity risk

8. Good design is thorough down to the last detail

Are edge cases handled? Loading states, errors, empty states, mobile?

• Evidence: specific missing or well-handled state

9. Good design is environmentally-friendly

(For digital products: performance, accessibility, dark mode, efficient rendering)

• Evidence: specific performance or accessibility concern

10. Good design is as little design as possible

Is everything present necessary? What could be removed?

• Evidence: specific element that could be simplified or cut

---

Verdict Logic

Calculate total score (0–30):

Score	Verdict	Meaning
24–30	REFINE	Strong design, targeted improvements
15–23	REFINE	Solid foundation, meaningful gaps to address
8–14	REDESIGN	Structural problems, rebuild core patterns
0–7	NEW	Start over — current design is a net liability

A score in the REFINE range with a 0 on principle 6 (honest) → automatic REDESIGN — dishonest design cannot be refined.

Output Format

# Design Audit: [Design Name / URL / Description]

## Scores

| # | Principle | Score | Evidence |
|---|-----------|-------|----------|
| 1 | Innovative | 2/3 | [specific element] |
| 2 | Useful | 3/3 | [specific task/flow] |
| ... | | | |
| **Total** | | **XX/30** | |

## Strengths (scores of 3)
- [Principle]: [what's working and why]

## Critical Issues (scores of 0–1)
- [Principle]: [what's broken, with specific evidence]

## Verdict: [NEW / REFINE / REDESIGN]

[2–3 sentences explaining the verdict]

---

## make-plan Handoff

Run: `/make-plan`

**Objective:** [New / Refine / Redesign] the [component/page/system] to address the following findings:

**Critical fixes:**
- [Principle N]: [Specific change needed] (file: `src/components/X.tsx`)
- [Principle N]: [Specific change needed]

**Improvements:**
- [Principle N]: [Specific enhancement]

**Do NOT change:**
- [Stable parts — list explicitly to prevent scope creep]

**Success criteria:**
- [ ] Audit re-run scores ≥ 24/30
- [ ] All 0-score principles addressed
- [ ] No regression on current 3-score principles

FinSurfing Context

When auditing FinSurfing UI:

Key things to watch:

• Principle 2 (Useful): Does the stock intelligence UI make the user's decision easier, or just display data?
• Principle 6 (Honest): AI-generated analysis must be clearly marked as AI output — no false confidence signals
• Principle 8 (Thorough): Check loading states for async market data, error states for API failures, empty states for no-data conditions
• Principle 9 (Environmental): Check accessibility on financial data tables and charts — color-only encoding for red/green P&L is a fail

Related Skills

• make-plan — Receives the handoff prompt from this audit
• do — Executes the plan produced by make-plan
• pathfinder — Use if the design audit reveals architectural issues in the component structure