gstack/design-consultation/sections/proposal-and-preview.md.tmpl

<!-- The font-selection procedure and the three-looks calibration in this section are derived from pbakaus/impeccable reference/new-work.md (Apache-2.0), rewritten and modified. See NOTICE.md. -->
## Phase 3: The Complete Proposal

Read this section in full, then apply its design/font rules → draft independently → offer outside voices → synthesize for Q2. Preview and writes require their later approvals.

### Your Design Knowledge (use to inform proposals — do NOT display as tables)

**Calibration: the three looks.** Avoid predictable compositions: cream/serif/terracotta; near-black/neon/glowing edges; or broadsheet hairlines/italic serif/tiny tracked mono. Use one only when the brief specifically calls for it. Otherwise choose a direction grounded in these users, rather than the category stereotype or its obvious opposite. For example, a book product can draw color from jackets and cloth instead of defaulting to cream and serif.

**Aesthetic directions** (pick the one that fits the product):
- Brutally Minimal — Type and whitespace only. No decoration. Modernist.
- Maximalist Chaos — Dense, layered, pattern-heavy. Y2K meets contemporary.
- Retro-Futuristic — Vintage tech nostalgia. Phosphor palette, bitmap type, warm monospace for data (no glow halos, no grid-paper backgrounds).
- Luxury/Refined — Serifs, high contrast, generous whitespace, precious metals.
- Playful/Toy-like — Rounded, springy (no overshoot), bold primaries. Approachable and fun.
- Editorial/Magazine — Strong typographic hierarchy, asymmetric grids, pull quotes.
- Brutalist/Raw — Exposed structure, one utilitarian grotesk, visible grid, no polish (a system stack only when the user asks for it by name).
- Art Deco — Geometric precision, metallic accents, symmetry, decorative borders.
- Organic/Natural — Earth tones, rounded forms, hand-drawn texture, grain.
- Industrial/Utilitarian — Function-first, data-dense, monospace accents, muted palette.

**Decoration levels:** minimal (typography does all the work) / intentional (subtle texture, grain, or background treatment) / expressive (full creative direction, layered depth, patterns)

**Layout approaches:** grid-disciplined (strict columns, predictable alignment) / creative-editorial (asymmetry, overlap, grid-breaking) / hybrid (grid for app, creative for marketing)

**Color approaches:** Restrained (1 accent + neutrals, color is rare and meaningful) / Committed (one hue owns the page, neutrals derive from it) / Full palette (primary + secondary + semantic colors for hierarchy) / Drenched (color as the primary design tool, surfaces carry it)

**Motion approaches:** minimal-functional (only transitions that aid comprehension) / intentional (subtle entrance animations, meaningful state transitions) / expressive (full choreography, scroll-driven, playful)

**Choosing faces: a procedure, not a menu.** (1) Name the audience's world (publication, notation, identity or object they read) and mode: Persuade (marketing), Operate (tasks), Read (long content), Experience (immersive). Match its tone. (2) Shortlist three faces per display/body/label/mono role. (3) Apply role exclusions. (4) Verify via WebSearch/Aside on Google Fonts/Fontshare, or local files/licenses; omit unverified faces. (5) Specify loading strategy.

**Font-verification fallback:** Skipping competitive research does not waive font verification. Offline, check local files/licenses. Otherwise describe roles/weights/proportions; mark font selection as pending verification in DESIGN.md. Continue palette/layout; defer the preview until fonts can be verified, or honor a user skip. Invent no face or URL.

{{OVERUSED_FONTS}}

**Anti-convergence directive:** VARY aesthetic, faces and palette across project generations; justify repetition. Light vs dark is not one of the dials: fix it to the use scene (who, where, lighting) until that scene changes. Unjustified convergence is slop.

**AI slop anti-patterns** (never include in your recommendations):
{{DESIGN_SLOP_BULLETS}}

### Coherence Validation

After any override, gently flag mismatches and offer alternatives: Brutalist/Minimal + expressive motion → quieter motion or keep intentionally; Drenched + minimal decoration → supporting decoration; editorial + dense data → hybrid layout. Never block; accept the user's final choice and proceed.

### Independent proposals, then synthesis

Draft your own direction from the product brief using the rules above. Keep that draft out of both reviewers' prompts; send the product context, not your answer.

{{DESIGN_OUTSIDE_VOICES}}

Compare completed outside proposals: explain agreements, differences, and ideas adopted with attribution. Verify any newly suggested fonts before adopting them using the same procedure above. Tie the recommendation to the memorable-thing answer. Do not count agreement as a vote or invent a missing proposal. Q2 names completed, unavailable, or declined voices and presents the recommendation.

**AskUserQuestion Q2 — present the full proposal with SAFE/RISK breakdown:**

```
Based on [product context] and [research findings / my design knowledge]:

AESTHETIC: [direction] — [one-line rationale]
DECORATION: [level] — [why this pairs with the aesthetic]
LAYOUT: [approach] — [why this fits the product type]
COLOR: [approach] + proposed palette (hex values) — [rationale]
TYPOGRAPHY: [display, body, label, mono assignments; a face may serve multiple roles] — [why these fonts]
SPACING: [base unit + density] — [rationale]
MOTION: [approach] — [rationale]

This system is coherent because [explain how choices reinforce each other].

INDEPENDENT INPUT: [completed/unavailable/skipped voices; agreements, differences, ideas adopted and product-specific reasons — omit comparisons if none completed]

SAFE CHOICES (category baseline — your users expect these):
  - [2-3 decisions that match category conventions, with rationale for playing safe]

RISKS (where your product gets its own face):
  - [2-3 deliberate departures from convention]
  - For each risk: what it is, why it works, what you gain, what it costs

Safe choices meet category expectations; risks make the product memorable.
Which risks appeal to you? Try others or adjust anything else?
```

Coherence alone can look generic. Propose at least 2 creative risks—type, accent, spacing, layout or motion—with rationale, benefit and cost alongside the category's safe choices.

**Options:** A) Looks great — proceed to Phase 5 if fonts are verified. B) Adjust [section] — Phase 4, then Q2 again. C) Different risks — revise the proposal, then Q2 again. D) Start over — draft another direction using the same confirmed brief. E) Skip the preview — proceed to Phase 6's Q-final, not straight to writing.

Revisions recheck fonts and coherence. If the product brief changes, label old proposals stale and offer fresh independent voices; do not claim they reviewed new context.

---

## Phase 4: Drill-downs (only if user requests adjustments)

Use one focused AskUserQuestion per requested drill-down: **Fonts:** 3-5 candidates, rationale/evocation and preview offer; **Colors:** 2-3 hex palettes and color theory; **Aesthetic:** product-fit directions and why; **Layout/Spacing/Motion:** concrete product-specific tradeoffs. Re-check coherence after each decision.

---

## Phase 5: Design System Preview (default ON)

After Q2 approval: pending fonts or a preview skip → Phase 6 with limitations. Generation unavailable/failed → offer Path B or skip, not unbounded retries.

### Path A: AI Mockups (if DESIGN_READY)

Apply the proposed system to realistic product screens:

```bash
eval "$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)"
eval "$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-paths)"
_DESIGN_DIR="$GSTACK_STATE_ROOT/projects/$SLUG/designs/design-system-$(date +%Y%m%d)"
mkdir -p "$_DESIGN_DIR"
echo "DESIGN_DIR: $_DESIGN_DIR"
```

Brief: Phase 3 aesthetic/colors/type/spacing/layout plus Phase 1 product context:

```bash
$D variants --brief "<product name: [name]. Product type: [type]. Aesthetic: [direction]. Colors: primary [hex], secondary [hex], neutrals [range]. Typography: display [font], body [font]. Layout: [approach]. Show a realistic [page type] screen with [specific content for this product].>" --count 3 --output-dir "$_DESIGN_DIR/"
```

Run quality check on each successful path returned by `variants`; never include failed variants:

```bash
$D check --image "$_DESIGN_DIR/variant-A.png" --brief "<the original brief>"
```

Read JSON, not exit code: `pass: false` means regenerate addressing `issues`, then recheck. `pass: true` with an unavailable/skipped warning is missing automated coverage; disclose it and inspect visually.

**Before presenting, self-gate:** Would a human designer be embarrassed to sign each variant? If yes, discard and regenerate. Hard rejects: purple gradient hero, 3-column SaaS grid, centered-everything, overused display face, generic stock photo, system-ui, gradient CTA, bubble-radius everything. Any trigger requires regeneration.

Read each accepted PNG inline, then open the board with those paths before inviting choices/remix.

{{DESIGN_SHOTGUN_LOOP}}

After final image confirmation, `$D extract` would write DESIGN.md in a Git repo: run it only in a fresh non-repository scratch directory. Bind `$D` and `APPROVED_IMAGE` to absolute paths:

```bash
_EXTRACT_DIR=$(mktemp -d /tmp/gstack-design-extract-XXXXXXXX) || exit 1
(
  cd "$_EXTRACT_DIR" || exit 1
  if git rev-parse --show-toplevel >/dev/null 2>&1; then
    echo "Extraction refused: scratch directory resolves to a Git repository" >&2
    exit 1
  fi
  "$D" extract --image "$APPROVED_IMAGE"
)
```

Compare extracted tokens with the approved image and verified fonts; show discrepancies at Q-final. Empty arrays, an "Unable to extract" mood or command failure → disclose fallback to Phase 3 values, never invent measured tokens.

Late visual changes return to the feedback loop: regenerate, recheck, reconfirm, then extract again. Only `generate` supplies `sessionFile` for `$D iterate --session "<returned sessionFile>" --feedback "<feedback>" --output "$_DESIGN_DIR/refined.png"`; variants must regenerate.

**Plan mode:** Carry the approved mockup paths/tokens into Phase 6's "## Proposed DESIGN.md" plan section. Its Q-final approval governs saving that content; defer the actual DESIGN.md to implementation.

### Path B: HTML Preview Page (fallback if DESIGN_NOT_AVAILABLE)

Create and open the HTML preview:

```bash
PREVIEW_FILE="/tmp/design-consultation-preview-$(date +%s).html"
```

Write the preview HTML to `$PREVIEW_FILE`, then open it:

```bash
open "$PREVIEW_FILE"
```

### Preview Page Requirements (Path B only)

Write a **single, self-contained HTML file**, no frameworks:

1. **Loads proposed fonts** via `<link>` from their step (4) verified Google Fonts/Fontshare/self-hosted source.
2. **Uses the proposed palette** throughout.
3. **Shows the product name**, not Lorem Ipsum, in the hero.
4. **Font specimen section:**
   - Each candidate in its hero/body/button/table role; compare same-role alternatives side by side using real domain content (e.g. civic tech: government data).
5. **Color palette section:**
   - Named hex swatches; primary/secondary/ghost buttons, cards, inputs, success/warning/error/info alerts; background/text contrast pairs.
6. **Realistic product mockups:** Render 2-3 Phase 1 product-type layouts with the full system, product name, domain content and proposed spacing/layout/radii:
   - **Dashboard/web app:** metrics table, sidebar nav, avatar header, stat cards.
   - **Marketing:** real-copy hero, features, testimonials, CTA.
   - **Settings/admin:** labeled inputs, toggles, dropdowns, save.
   - **Auth/onboarding:** branded login, social buttons, validation states.
7. **Light/dark toggle:** CSS custom properties plus a JS button.
8. **Clean, professional layout.**
9. **Responsive** at every width.

Show how their product feels, beyond a font/color inventory.

If `open` fails (headless environment), tell the user: *"I wrote the preview to [path] — open it in your browser to see the fonts and colors rendered."*

If the user says skip the preview, go directly to Phase 6.

---

## Phase 6: Write DESIGN.md & Confirm

Only Path A invokes `$D extract`, isolated as above. For Path B, use the approved HTML preview's CSS values. No preview: approved Phase 3 values; mark only unverified fonts pending. Retain rationale and unchanged existing decisions.

**Confirm before writing.** Prepare the contents below; show decisions and agent-selected defaults. AskUserQuestion Q-final:
- A) Approve — write DESIGN.md and CLAUDE.md; in plan mode, save Proposed DESIGN.md in the plan only
- B) Revise — return to Phase 3, then confirm again
- C) Start over — return to Phase 1

Wait. Only A permits the writes below; B/C leave project files untouched. Honor prior explicit approval of these exact writes without re-asking. Any subsequent token, font or direction change invalidates that approval: update the proposal, reverify affected fonts/preview, and ask Q-final again. A changed product brief also invalidates prior independent proposals.

**If in plan mode:** Write the DESIGN.md content into the plan file as a "## Proposed DESIGN.md" section. Do NOT write the actual file — that happens at implementation time.

**If NOT in plan mode:** apply the approved Phase 0 format choice, then write root `DESIGN.md`. New, fresh and converted files use google-labs-code/design.md format below: all tokens belong in the five normative YAML groups; prose explains rationale/use without repeating values. Preserve the line-2 format marker. A kept-legacy or unknown-format Update instead retains its own shape; persist `legacy-keep` only for the chosen legacy path. Preserve the prior file in a backup before a fresh replacement.

```markdown
---
# gstack: design-md-format=spec
name: [Project Name]
description: [one sentence: mood, material, energy]
colors:
  primary: "#..."          # descriptive slugs; hex, or the project's canonical color space
  on-primary: "#..."
  surface: "#..."
  text: "#..."
  text-muted: "#..."
  accent: "#..."
  success: "#..."
  warning: "#..."
  error: "#..."
typography:
  display:
    fontFamily: [face]
    fontWeight: [weight]
    fontSize: [clamp() or rem]
    letterSpacing: [em]
  body:
    fontFamily: [face]
    fontSize: 1rem
    lineHeight: 1.5
  label:
    fontFamily: [face]
    fontSize: 0.75rem
    letterSpacing: 0.04em
  mono:
    fontFamily: [face]
    fontFeature: tnum
rounded:
  sm: 4px
  md: 8px
  lg: 12px
  full: 9999px
spacing:
  xs: 4px
  sm: 8px
  md: 16px
  lg: 24px
  xl: 32px
  2xl: 48px
components:
  button-primary:
    backgroundColor: "{colors.primary}"
    textColor: "{colors.on-primary}"
    rounded: "{rounded.md}"
  button-primary-hover:
    backgroundColor: "#..."
  input:
    borderColor: "{colors.text-muted}"
    rounded: "{rounded.sm}"
  card:
    backgroundColor: "{colors.surface}"
    rounded: "{rounded.lg}"
  nav-link:
    textColor: "{colors.text}"
---

# [Project Name]

## Overview

**Creative North Star:** [one sentence: aesthetic + why it fits these users]
**Product context:** [product, users, category/peers, project type]
**Mode per surface:** [one line each: Persuade / Operate / Read / Experience]
**Reference sites:** [URLs, if research was done]
**Key characteristics:** [3-5 bullets: first-five-second impressions]

## Colors

**Strategy:** [Restrained / Committed / Full palette / Drenched] — [why]
**Light or dark:** [decided by the use scene: who, where, under what light]
[Explain which tokens signal interaction or emphasis, how neutrals derive from the palette, and how dark-mode surfaces preserve hierarchy rather than merely inverting lightness.]

## Typography

[Faces' source world, mode/register, roles and display boundaries; loading, scale rationale, justified overused-list exceptions]

## Layout

[Breakpoint grids, max width, density, large/small spacing rhythm, intentional grid breaks]

## Elevation & Depth

[Depth: offset + soft-blur shadows, tints, borders; no zero-offset glow]

## Shapes

[Radius hierarchy/uses; nested inner radius = outer radius − gap]

## Components

[Per component: hover/focus-visible/active/disabled states, invariants and adaptations]

## Do's and Don'ts

- Do: [3-5 specific, checkable rules]
- Don't: [3-5 system-specific anti-patterns, including this category's tempting catalog entries]

## Motion

- **Approach:** [minimal-functional / intentional / expressive]
- **Easing:** enter(ease-out) exit(ease-in) move(ease-in-out)
- **Duration:** micro(50-100ms) short(150-250ms) medium(250-400ms) long(400-700ms)
- **The one authored moment:** [what it is]

## Decisions Log
| Date | Decision | Rationale |
|------|----------|-----------|
| [today] | Initial design system created | Created by /design-consultation based on [product context / research] |
```

Use real token values, no placeholders; omit invented `components` entries and unverified fontFamily values. Describe pending font roles in prose instead. Outside plan mode, after writing DESIGN.md, run `bun --no-env-file run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-design-md.ts check DESIGN.md`: require `DESIGN_MD_FORMAT: spec` for new/fresh/converted/spec files, `legacy` with `legacy-keep` for a kept legacy file, or the disclosed `unknown` format for a preserved unknown file. Never convert a kept file just to make validation say spec.

**Outside plan mode, update CLAUDE.md** (or create it if it doesn't exist) — append this section:

```markdown
## Design System
Always read DESIGN.md before making any visual or UI decisions.
All font choices, colors, spacing, and aesthetic direction are defined there.
Do not deviate without explicit user approval.
In QA mode, flag any code that doesn't match DESIGN.md.
```

After shipping DESIGN.md, if the session produced screen-level mockups or page layouts
(not just system-level tokens), suggest:
"Want to see this design system as working Pretext-native HTML? Run /design-html."

---