Files
gstack/design-consultation/sections/proposal-and-preview.md.tmpl
T
Garry TanandOpenAI Codex 9f81911136 v1.86.0.0 feat: route outside reviews by harness (#2850)
* feat: add a restricted and supervised Claude Code runner

Preserve configured authentication and models while enforcing tool access, strict completion JSON, bounded output and process cleanup. Cover argv, failure handling, session metadata and Windows process containment.

* feat: route outside reviews by harness and migrate wrapper installs

Use Claude Code from Codex and Codex from other supported hosts, with shared invocation rendering, positive gate validation and per-phase provenance. Rename /claude to /claude-code, repair managed shared and copied installations safely, and generate native Kiro skills. Add installed-workflow, failure-injection and live cross-harness regression coverage.

* test: recognize CEO mode labels without terminal spacing

The paid workflow rendered SCOPEEXPANSION at option 4, but its driver required a literal space. Match the leading mode title without cursor-spacing artifacts and ignore adjacent preview text. Preserve missing-target failures and downstream posture assertions.

* test: isolate plan-count fixtures before starting review workflows

Seed the complete test plan in a private git repository before launching Claude, so a bare slash command cannot review the live workspace while a delayed fixture message remains queued. Preserve count thresholds, parsers and budgets. Add initial-context and installed-discovery tests, and retain startup/terminal diagnostics on failed evaluations.

* test: stabilize review fixtures and Claude eval startup

Preserve source boundaries in workflow judge inputs, isolate CEO mode plans, and wait for interactive trust input readiness. Keep startup failure evidence and retain existing models, budgets, and assertions.

Co-Authored-By: OpenAI Codex <noreply@openai.com>

* test: classify collapsed review modes and isolate seeded findings

Keep review questions out of the setup count when terminal cursor positioning removes spaces. State existing webhook safeguards so the five-finding control measures its seeded defects without accidental extra security and concurrency gaps. Preserve question bands and the paired control.

Co-Authored-By: OpenAI Codex <noreply@openai.com>

* test: isolate browser daemon state across free shards

Co-Authored-By: OpenAI Codex <noreply@openai.com>

* test: stabilize native review counting and interactive navigation

Co-Authored-By: OpenAI Codex <noreply@openai.com>

* chore: prepare v1.82.0.0 release

Co-Authored-By: OpenAI Codex <noreply@openai.com>

* fix: eliminate browser and process-cleanup test flakes

Pin every CI surface to Bun 1.4.0 to avoid extra-stdio finalizers closing
reused live sockets. Add an isolated GC/listener regression that fails on
Bun 1.3.13, and prevent coordinated rollback to an affected CI runtime.

Check renderer cleanup against the render's own staging directory so
concurrent renders cannot invalidate the assertion. Make the no-pgrep
process-tree walk tolerate disappearing /proc entries, and synchronize
its test fixture through child readiness and pipe EOF instead of sleeps.

Validation: 9,157 passed, 31 skipped, zero failures across 556 files with
retries disabled. Build, all-host generation freshness, and skill checks
passed. All three races have failing-before/passing-after regressions.

* fix: count completed native review questions in evals

* fix: drive review navigation from confirmed native choices

* fix: require complete section-loading eval reports

* test: isolate telemetry HTTP transport from local assertions

* fix: keep review input on the active native question

* test: let tunnel revocation daemon choose an available port

* test: allocate available ports for pairing and watchdog fixtures

* fix: stabilize planning eval navigation and phase reporting

* test: isolate installed runtime paths in planning evals

* test: stabilize review evidence and concurrent refresh fixtures

* fix: resolve design findings before editing the plan

* fix: honor and persist disabled outside plan reviews

* fix: preserve planning decisions and terminal evidence

Load installed host reviews at autoplan phase entry and wait for completed
reviewers and saved artifacts. Reuse approved remedies while preserving
individual finding decisions.

Drive interactive evals from the current terminal viewport, bind native
questions across scrolling, and require complete native report evidence.
Cover captured stale menus, permission lifecycles, setup classification,
and disabled-review tool availability with deterministic regressions.

Advance release metadata and the upgrade migration to the unclaimed
1.83.0.0 slot.

* fix: drive native review questions and preserve current plans

Use the native single-choice keyboard protocol and current terminal viewport,
with per-question navigation inside packets and completed-call coverage.
Keep permissions, multi-select menus, and Submit controls distinct.

Send Autoplan reviewers the amended implementation plan, keep its review record
separate, and supply retained application contracts in the chain fixture.
Clarify individual DevEx decisions and complete CEO fix options; use one active
plan destination for the section-loading report.

* fix: preserve complete plan-review decisions

* fix: recognize native plan dialogs and reviewer controls

* fix: preserve review decisions and phase completion

* fix: recognize completed reviews without losing findings

* fix: preserve review continuity and native eval completion

* test: fix native review completion and eval retry isolation

* test: handle native review menus and complete eval fixtures

* test: fix native review setup, completion, and isolation failures

* test: limit native skill discovery to runtime assets

* fix: bind Autoplan reviews to full ordered phase inputs

* test: fix planning eval routing, counting, and timeout handling

* chore: advance queued release to v1.84.0.0

* fix: preserve complete review inputs and planning decisions

* fix: reconcile review approvals and preserve phase obligations

* fix: preserve review obligations and unblock eval permissions

Carry recorded Autoplan requirements into blind phase inputs, require Eng
review approvals before exit, and exercise combined asynchronous flows in
CEO reviews. Correct native finding and handoff classification and unblock
repeated report edits using scoped request identities.

* fix: retain plan requirements and complete native review dialogs

* fix: complete native review prompts and retain plan references

* fix: preserve review inputs and classify native eval evidence

* fix: check competing completion orders in CEO reviews

* fix: recognize review decisions and require phase methodology

Require the current phase methodology before Autoplan snapshots. Correct
substantive decision, closed handoff, and cache-finding classification, and
honor the recommended implementation approach in native review dialogs.

Add captured-transcript regressions without changing review thresholds,
provider models, retries, or deadlines.

* test: bind native review decisions and close completed handoffs

* fix: complete review dialogs and verify methodology delivery

* fix: preserve review evidence and unblock native eval prompts

* fix: handle native review question completions

* fix: recognize native review narration and controls

* fix: count native review decisions and isolate eval fixtures

* test: verify seeded review coverage and current artifact permissions

* test: isolate model and brain-aware skill renders

* fix: repair native workflow evaluation and clarify review steps

* fix: stabilize workflow eval evidence and review guidance

* test: repair native workflow observation and fixture isolation

* fix: recognize completed workflow evidence and owned skill reads

* test: repair seeded workflow delivery and completion evidence

* test: recognize current review evidence across native forms

* test: handle native review variants and permission redraws

* fix: honor review preferences and recognize native eval evidence

* test: recognize completed review decisions and queued permissions

* test: match current review contracts and partial-line edits

* test: recognize completed workflow evidence and bounded human waits

* fix: preserve review entry gates and native eval interactions

* fix: recognize native workflow evidence and preserve review gates

* test: recognize current review evidence and preconfigure workflow fixtures

* test: recognize completed review findings and scoped artifact permissions

* fix: stabilize native workflow review and permission evidence

* fix: recognize current review evidence and scoped edit confirmations

Clarify Design and engineering review entry instructions and Design scoring.
Recognize required legacy coverage and public Autoplan completion recaps.
Bind the pending Edit confirmation to its exact file, ordered digest, and
one-request approval when a preceding command display remains visible.
Keep reviews within their existing size limits and preserve scope gates
when extracting workflow fixtures from either supported preamble header.

Keep failure outcomes, review thresholds, provider choices, and eval budgets.

* fix: recover review workflow progress and eval evidence

* fix: recognize valid review evidence and scope selection

* test: fix review evidence parsing and repeated artifact prompts

* test: recognize valid review decisions and pending native cards

* fix(plan-eng-review): keep final navigation consistent with approved tasks

* test: recognize valid review evidence and bind legacy diff requests

* fix: stabilize review eval evidence and harness repair guidance

* docs: update project documentation for v1.85.0.0

Co-Authored-By: OpenAI Codex <noreply@openai.com>

* test: fix Windows CI fixtures and credential scan

Rebase captured JSON values and filesystem evidence using the appropriate
path convention. Compile native fake CLIs on Windows and synchronize pipe
holder readiness, with cleanup retained when assertions fail.

Assemble synthetic credential fixtures at runtime so the added-line scan
keeps enforcing the same gate without flagging its own rejection controls.

Discover generated skills directly for the empty-find regression check,
avoiding a recursive scan through saved evaluation artifacts and dependencies.

* fix: preserve source renders on Windows

Compare canonical generator paths using native separators so an output
sidecar pointing at the source cannot overwrite its skill or metadata.
Keep the regression fixture isolated from the real checkout and expose
freshness diagnostics before asserting subprocess status.

Detach Windows drain-test pipe holders from the fake provider's automatic
child cleanup while preserving the enclosing runner job and its assertions.

* fix: clarify outside review fallback and CEO decisions

Render one applicable own-harness fallback path and retain native review,
disabled policy, and missing-coverage semantics. Align report field names
and mode labels, and make the existing per-cut scope approval explicit.

Regenerate skill outputs and keep the workflow judge's model, thresholds,
and retry policy unchanged.

* chore: move release to free version slot (v1.86.0.0)

PR #2852 now claims v1.85.0.0. Align the release metadata and
rename migration so upgrades from that version still receive it.

Co-Authored-By: OpenAI Codex <noreply@openai.com>

* fix: include engineering review prerequisites and restore branch context

* fix: recognize coverage diagrams and clarify design review instructions

* fix: preserve file identities and join Windows test processes

---------

Co-authored-by: OpenAI Codex <noreply@openai.com>
2026-09-14 14:32:45 -07:00

317 lines
15 KiB
Cheetah
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
<!-- 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
Develop your draft with the design knowledge below. Compare completed outside proposals: explain agreements, differences, and ideas adopted with attribution. 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: [3 font recommendations with 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
The safe choices keep you literate in your category. The risks are where
your product becomes memorable. Which risks appeal to you? Want to see
different ones? 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 — generate the preview page. B) I want to adjust [section]. C) I want different risks — show me wilder options. D) Start over with a different direction. E) Skip the preview, just write DESIGN.md.
### 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 and surface mode: Persuade (marketing), Operate (tasks), Read (long content), or Experience (immersive). Choose the corresponding 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 and 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.
---
## 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)
Preview the proposed system using the available path.
### Path A: AI Mockups (if DESIGN_READY)
Generate AI mockups applying the proposed system to realistic product screens.
```bash
eval "$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)"
_DESIGN_DIR="$HOME/.gstack/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 variant:
```bash
$D check --image "$_DESIGN_DIR/variant-A.png" --brief "<the original brief>"
```
Read each PNG to show the variants inline.
**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.
Open the board before inviting the user to choose or remix.
{{DESIGN_SHOTGUN_LOOP}}
After the user picks a direction:
- `$D extract --image "$_DESIGN_DIR/variant-<CHOSEN>.png"`: Phase 6 color/type/spacing tokens come from the approved visual, not text alone.
- Further iteration: `$D iterate --feedback "<user's feedback>" --output "$_DESIGN_DIR/refined.png"`
**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` for approved mockup tokens. For Path B, use the approved HTML preview's CSS values. No preview: approved Phase 3 values with pending fonts. Retain Phase 3 rationale.
**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.
**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:** Write root `DESIGN.md` in google-labs-code/design.md format. All tokens belong in the five normative YAML groups below; prose explains rationale/use without repeating values. Preserve the line-2 format marker to prevent conversion re-asks. A Phase 0 kept-legacy file instead retains its own shape.
```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. Outside plan mode, after writing DESIGN.md, require `bun --no-env-file run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-design-md.ts check DESIGN.md` to print `DESIGN_MD_FORMAT: 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."
---