design-shotgun

Preamble

eval "$(~/.vibestack/bin/vibe-slug 2>/dev/null)" 2>/dev/null || SLUG="unknown"
_LEARN_FILE="${VIBESTACK_HOME:-$HOME/.vibestack}/projects/${SLUG:-unknown}/learnings.jsonl"
if [ -f "$_LEARN_FILE" ]; then
  _LEARN_COUNT=$(wc -l < "$_LEARN_FILE" 2>/dev/null | tr -d ' ')
  echo "LEARNINGS: $_LEARN_COUNT entries loaded"
  if [ "$_LEARN_COUNT" -gt 5 ] 2>/dev/null; then
    ~/.vibestack/bin/vibe-learnings-search --limit 5 2>/dev/null || true
  fi
else
  echo "LEARNINGS: none yet"
fi

DESIGN SETUP

# vibestack does not include a design daemon.
echo "DESIGN_NOT_AVAILABLE"

If DESIGN_NOT_AVAILABLE: skip visual mockup generation and fall back to text-based design review.

UX Principles: How Users Actually Behave

These principles govern how real humans interact with interfaces. They are observed behavior, not preferences. Apply them before, during, and after every design decision.

The Three Laws of Usability

1. Don't make me think. Every page should be self-evident. If a user stops to think "What do I click?" or "What does this mean?", the design has failed. Self-evident > self-explanatory > requires explanation.

2. Clicks don't matter, thinking does. Three mindless, unambiguous clicks beat one click that requires thought. Each step should feel like an obvious choice (animal, vegetable, or mineral), not a puzzle.

3. Omit, then omit again. Get rid of half the words on each page, then get rid of half of what's left. Happy talk (self-congratulatory text) must die. Instructions must die. If they need reading, the design has failed.

How Users Actually Behave

• Users scan, they don't read. Design for scanning: visual hierarchy (prominence = importance), clearly defined areas, headings and bullet lists, highlighted key terms. We're designing billboards going by at 60 mph, not product brochures people will study.
• Users satisfice. They pick the first reasonable option, not the best. Make the right choice the most visible choice.
• Users muddle through. They don't figure out how things work. They wing it. If they accomplish their goal by accident, they won't seek the "right" way. Once they find something that works, no matter how badly, they stick to it.
• Users don't read instructions. They dive in. Guidance must be brief, timely, and unavoidable, or it won't be seen.

Billboard Design for Interfaces

• Use conventions. Logo top-left, nav top/left, search = magnifying glass. Don't innovate on navigation to be clever. Innovate when you KNOW you have a better idea, otherwise use conventions. Even across languages and cultures, web conventions let people identify the logo, nav, search, and main content.
• Visual hierarchy is everything. Related things are visually grouped. Nested things are visually contained. More important = more prominent. If everything shouts, nothing is heard. Start with the assumption everything is visual noise, guilty until proven innocent.
• Make clickable things obviously clickable. No relying on hover states for discoverability, especially on mobile where hover doesn't exist. Shape, location, and formatting (color, underlining) must signal clickability without interaction.
• Eliminate noise. Three sources: too many things shouting for attention (shouting), things not organized logically (disorganization), and too much stuff (clutter). Fix noise by removal, not addition.
• Clarity trumps consistency. If making something significantly clearer requires making it slightly inconsistent, choose clarity every time.

Navigation as Wayfinding

Users on the web have no sense of scale, direction, or location. Navigation must always answer: What site is this? What page am I on? What are the major sections? What are my options at this level? Where am I? How can I search?

Persistent navigation on every page. Breadcrumbs for deep hierarchies. Current section visually indicated. The "trunk test": cover everything except the navigation. You should still know what site this is, what page you're on, and what the major sections are. If not, the navigation has failed.

The Goodwill Reservoir

Users start with a reservoir of goodwill. Every friction point depletes it.

Deplete faster: Hiding info users want (pricing, contact, shipping). Punishing users for not doing things your way (formatting requirements on phone numbers). Asking for unnecessary information. Putting sizzle in their way (splash screens, forced tours, interstitials). Unprofessional or sloppy appearance.

Replenish: Know what users want to do and make it obvious. Tell them what they want to know upfront. Save them steps wherever possible. Make it easy to recover from errors. When in doubt, apologize.

Mobile: Same Rules, Higher Stakes

All the above applies on mobile, just more so. Real estate is scarce, but never sacrifice usability for space savings. Affordances must be VISIBLE: no cursor means no hover-to-discover. Touch targets must be big enough (44px minimum). Flat design can strip away useful visual information that signals interactivity. Prioritize ruthlessly: things needed in a hurry go close at hand, everything else a few taps away with an obvious path to get there.

Step 0: Session Detection

Check for prior design exploration sessions for this project:

eval "$(~/.vibestack/bin/vibe-slug 2>/dev/null)"
setopt +o nomatch 2>/dev/null || true
_PREV=$(find ~/.vibestack/projects/$SLUG/designs/ -name "approved.json" -maxdepth 2 2>/dev/null | sort -r | head -5)
[ -n "$_PREV" ] && echo "PREVIOUS_SESSIONS_FOUND" || echo "NO_PREVIOUS_SESSIONS"
echo "$_PREV"

If PREVIOUS_SESSIONS_FOUND: Read each approved.json, display a summary, then AskUserQuestion:

"Previous design explorations for this project:

• [date]: [screen] — chose variant [X], feedback: '[summary]'

A) Revisit — reopen the comparison board to adjust your choices B) New exploration — start fresh with new or updated instructions C) Something else"

If A: regenerate the board from existing variant PNGs, reopen, and resume the feedback loop. If B: proceed to Step 1.

If NO_PREVIOUS_SESSIONS: Show the first-time message:

"This is /design-shotgun — your visual brainstorming tool. I'll generate multiple AI design directions, open them side-by-side in your browser, and you pick your favorite. You can run /design-shotgun anytime during development to explore design directions for any part of your product. Let's start."

Step 1: Context Gathering

When design-shotgun is invoked from plan-design-review, design-consultation, or another skill, the calling skill has already gathered context. Check for $_DESIGN_BRIEF — if it's set, skip to Step 2.

When run standalone, gather context to build a proper design brief.

Required context (5 dimensions):

1. Who — who is the design for? (persona, audience, expertise level)
2. Job to be done — what is the user trying to accomplish on this screen/page?
3. What exists — what's already in the codebase? (existing components, pages, patterns)
4. User flow — how do users arrive at this screen and where do they go next?
5. Edge cases — long names, zero results, error states, mobile, first-time vs power user

Auto-gather first:

cat DESIGN.md 2>/dev/null | head -80 || echo "NO_DESIGN_MD"

ls src/ app/ pages/ components/ 2>/dev/null | head -30

setopt +o nomatch 2>/dev/null || true
ls ~/.vibestack/projects/$SLUG/*office-hours* 2>/dev/null | head -5

If DESIGN.md exists, tell the user: "I'll follow your design system in DESIGN.md by default. If you want to go off the reservation on visual direction, just say so — design-shotgun will follow your lead, but won't diverge by default."

Check for a live site to screenshot (for the "I don't like THIS" use case):

curl -s -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}" http://localhost:3000 2>/dev/null || echo "NO_LOCAL_SITE"

If a local site is running AND the user referenced a URL or said something like "I don't like how this looks," screenshot the current page and use $D evolve instead of $D variants to generate improvement variants from the existing design.

AskUserQuestion with pre-filled context: Pre-fill what you inferred from the codebase, DESIGN.md, and office-hours output. Then ask for what's missing. Frame as ONE question covering all gaps:

"Here's what I know: [pre-filled context]. I'm missing [gaps]. Tell me: [specific questions about the gaps]. How many variants? (default 3, up to 8 for important screens)"

Two rounds max of context gathering, then proceed with what you have and note assumptions.

Step 2: Taste Memory

Read both the persistent taste profile (cross-session) AND the per-session approved designs to bias generation toward the user's demonstrated taste.

Persistent taste profile (v1 schema at ~/.vibestack/projects/$SLUG/taste-profile.json):

Read the persistent taste profile if it exists:

_TASTE_PROFILE=~/.vibestack/projects/$SLUG/taste-profile.json
if [ -f "$_TASTE_PROFILE" ]; then
  # Schema v1: { dimensions: { fonts, colors, layouts, aesthetics }, sessions: [] }
  # Each dimension has approved[] and rejected[] entries with
  # { value, confidence, approved_count, rejected_count, last_seen }
  # Confidence decays 5% per week of inactivity — computed at read time.
  cat "$_TASTE_PROFILE" 2>/dev/null | head -200
  echo "TASTE_PROFILE_FOUND"
else
  echo "NO_TASTE_PROFILE"
fi

If TASTE_PROFILE_FOUND: Summarize the strongest signals (top 3 approved entries per dimension by confidence * approved_count). Include them in the design brief:

"Based on ${SESSION_COUNT} prior sessions, this user's taste leans toward: fonts [top-3], colors [top-3], layouts [top-3], aesthetics [top-3]. Bias generation toward these unless the user explicitly requests a different direction. Also avoid their strong rejections: [top-3 rejected per dimension]."

If NO_TASTE_PROFILE: Fall through to per-session approved.json files (legacy).

Conflict handling: If the current user request contradicts a strong persistent signal (e.g., "make it playful" when taste profile strongly prefers minimal), flag it: "Note: your taste profile strongly prefers minimal. You're asking for playful this time — I'll proceed, but want me to update the taste profile, or treat this as a one-off?"

Decay: Confidence scores decay 5% per week. A font approved 6 months ago with 10 approvals has less weight than one approved last week. The decay calculation happens at read time, not write time, so the file only grows on change.

Schema migration: If the file has no version field or version: 0, it's the legacy approved.json aggregate (taste-update not available in vibestack) will migrate it to schema v1 on the next write.

Per-session approved.json files (legacy, still supported):

setopt +o nomatch 2>/dev/null || true
_TASTE=$(find ~/.vibestack/projects/$SLUG/designs/ -name "approved.json" -maxdepth 2 2>/dev/null | sort -r | head -10)

If prior sessions exist, read each approved.json and extract patterns from the approved variants. Merge these into the taste-profile.json-derived signal — if the profile already says "user prefers Geist font" (from aggregated history), the approved.json files add the specific recent approval context.

Limit to last 10 sessions. Try/catch JSON parse on each (skip corrupted files).

Updating taste profile after a design-shotgun session: When the user picks a variant, log the approval via vibe-learnings-log. When they explicitly reject a variant, log the rejection via vibe-learnings-log. The CLI handles schema migration from approved.json, decay, and conflict flagging.

Step 3: Generate Variants

Set up the output directory:

eval "$(~/.vibestack/bin/vibe-slug 2>/dev/null)"
_DESIGN_DIR="$HOME/.vibestack/projects/$SLUG/designs/<screen-name>-$(date +%Y%m%d)"
mkdir -p "$_DESIGN_DIR"
echo "DESIGN_DIR: $_DESIGN_DIR"

Replace <screen-name> with a descriptive kebab-case name from the context gathering.

Step 3a: Concept Generation

Before any API calls, generate N text concepts describing each variant's design direction. Each concept should be a distinct creative direction, not a minor variation. Present them as a lettered list:

I'll explore 3 directions:

A) "Name" — one-line visual description of this direction
B) "Name" — one-line visual description of this direction
C) "Name" — one-line visual description of this direction

Draw on DESIGN.md, taste memory, and the user's request to make each concept distinct.

Anti-convergence directive (hard requirement): Each variant MUST use a different font family, color palette, and layout approach. If two variants look like siblings — same typographic feel, overlapping color temperature, comparable layout rhythm — one of them failed. Regenerate the weaker one with a deliberately different direction.

Concrete test: if someone could swap the headline text between two variants without noticing, they're too similar. Variants should feel like they came from three different design teams, not the same team at three different coffee levels.

Step 3b: Concept Confirmation

Use AskUserQuestion to confirm before spending API credits:

"These are the {N} directions I'll generate. Each takes ~60s, but I'll run them all in parallel so total time is ~60 seconds regardless of count."

Options:

• A) Generate all {N} — looks good
• B) I want to change some concepts (tell me which)
• C) Add more variants (I'll suggest additional directions)
• D) Fewer variants (tell me which to drop)

If B: incorporate feedback, re-present concepts, re-confirm. Max 2 rounds. If C: add concepts, re-present, re-confirm. If D: drop specified concepts, re-present, re-confirm.

Step 3c: Parallel Generation

If evolving from a screenshot (user said "I don't like THIS"), take ONE screenshot first:

$B screenshot "$_DESIGN_DIR/current.png"

Launch N Agent subagents in a single message (parallel execution). Use the Agent tool with subagent_type: "general-purpose" for each variant. Each agent is independent and handles its own generation, quality check, verification, and retry.

Important: $D path propagation. The $D variable from DESIGN SETUP is a shell variable that agents do NOT inherit. Substitute the resolved absolute path (from the DESIGN_READY: /path/to/design output in Step 0) into each agent prompt.

Agent prompt template (one per variant, substitute all {...} values):

Generate a design variant and save it.

Design binary: {absolute path to $D binary}
Brief: {the full variant-specific brief for this direction}
Output: /tmp/variant-{letter}.png
Final location: {_DESIGN_DIR absolute path}/variant-{letter}.png

Steps:
1. Run: {$D path} generate --brief "{brief}" --output /tmp/variant-{letter}.png
2. If the command fails with a rate limit error (429 or "rate limit"), wait 5 seconds
   and retry. Up to 3 retries.
3. If the output file is missing or empty after the command succeeds, retry once.
4. Copy: cp /tmp/variant-{letter}.png {_DESIGN_DIR}/variant-{letter}.png
5. Quality check: {$D path} check --image {_DESIGN_DIR}/variant-{letter}.png --brief "{brief}"
   If quality check fails, retry generation once.
6. Verify: ls -lh {_DESIGN_DIR}/variant-{letter}.png
7. Report exactly one of:
   VARIANT_{letter}_DONE: {file size}
   VARIANT_{letter}_FAILED: {error description}
   VARIANT_{letter}_RATE_LIMITED: exhausted retries

For the evolve path, replace step 1 with:

{$D path} evolve --screenshot {_DESIGN_DIR}/current.png --brief "{brief}" --output /tmp/variant-{letter}.png

Why /tmp/ then cp? In observed sessions, $D generate --output ~/.vibestack/... failed with "The operation was aborted" while --output /tmp/... succeeded. This is a sandbox restriction. Always generate to /tmp/ first, then cp.

Step 3d: Results

After all agents complete:

1. Read each generated PNG inline (Read tool) so the user sees all variants at once.
2. Report status: "All {N} variants generated in ~{actual time}. {successes} succeeded, {failures} failed."
3. For any failures: report explicitly with the error. Do NOT silently skip.
4. If zero variants succeeded: fall back to sequential generation (one at a time with $D generate, showing each as it lands). Tell the user: "Parallel generation failed (likely rate limiting). Falling back to sequential..."
5. Proceed to Step 4 (comparison board).

Dynamic image list for comparison board: When proceeding to Step 4, construct the image list from whatever variant files actually exist, not a hardcoded A/B/C list:

setopt +o nomatch 2>/dev/null || true  # zsh compat
_IMAGES=$(ls "$_DESIGN_DIR"/variant-*.png 2>/dev/null | tr '\n' ',' | sed 's/,$//')

Use $_IMAGES in the $D compare --images command.

Step 4: Comparison Board + Feedback Loop

Comparison Board + Feedback Loop

Create the comparison board and serve it over HTTP:

$D compare --images "$_DESIGN_DIR/variant-A.png,$_DESIGN_DIR/variant-B.png,$_DESIGN_DIR/variant-C.png" --output "$_DESIGN_DIR/design-board.html" --serve

This command generates the board HTML, starts an HTTP server on a random port, and opens it in the user's default browser. Run it in the background with & because the server needs to stay running while the user interacts with the board.

Parse the port from stderr output: SERVE_STARTED: port=XXXXX. You need this for the board URL and for reloading during regeneration cycles.

PRIMARY WAIT: AskUserQuestion with board URL

After the board is serving, use AskUserQuestion to wait for the user. Include the board URL so they can click it if they lost the browser tab:

"I've opened a comparison board with the design variants: http://127.0.0.1:<PORT>/ — Rate them, leave comments, remix elements you like, and click Submit when you're done. Let me know when you've submitted your feedback (or paste your preferences here). If you clicked Regenerate or Remix on the board, tell me and I'll generate new variants."

Do NOT use AskUserQuestion to ask which variant the user prefers. The comparison board IS the chooser. AskUserQuestion is just the blocking wait mechanism.

After the user responds to AskUserQuestion:

Check for feedback files next to the board HTML:

• $_DESIGN_DIR/feedback.json — written when user clicks Submit (final choice)
• $_DESIGN_DIR/feedback-pending.json — written when user clicks Regenerate/Remix/More Like This

if [ -f "$_DESIGN_DIR/feedback.json" ]; then
  echo "SUBMIT_RECEIVED"
  cat "$_DESIGN_DIR/feedback.json"
elif [ -f "$_DESIGN_DIR/feedback-pending.json" ]; then
  echo "REGENERATE_RECEIVED"
  cat "$_DESIGN_DIR/feedback-pending.json"
  rm "$_DESIGN_DIR/feedback-pending.json"
else
  echo "NO_FEEDBACK_FILE"
fi

The feedback JSON has this shape:

{
  "preferred": "A",
  "ratings": { "A": 4, "B": 3, "C": 2 },
  "comments": { "A": "Love the spacing" },
  "overall": "Go with A, bigger CTA",
  "regenerated": false
}

If feedback.json found: The user clicked Submit on the board. Read preferred, ratings, comments, overall from the JSON. Proceed with the approved variant.

If feedback-pending.json found: The user clicked Regenerate/Remix on the board.

1. Read regenerateAction from the JSON ("different", "match", "more_like_B", "remix", or custom text)
2. If regenerateAction is "remix", read remixSpec (e.g. {"layout":"A","colors":"B"})
3. Generate new variants with $D iterate or $D variants using updated brief
4. Create new board: $D compare --images "..." --output "$_DESIGN_DIR/design-board.html"
5. Reload the board in the user's browser (same tab): curl -s -X POST http://127.0.0.1:PORT/api/reload -H 'Content-Type: application/json' -d '{"html":"$_DESIGN_DIR/design-board.html"}'
6. The board auto-refreshes. AskUserQuestion again with the same board URL to wait for the next round of feedback. Repeat until feedback.json appears.

If NO_FEEDBACK_FILE: The user typed their preferences directly in the AskUserQuestion response instead of using the board. Use their text response as the feedback.

POLLING FALLBACK: Only use polling if $D serve fails (no port available). In that case, show each variant inline using the Read tool (so the user can see them), then use AskUserQuestion: "The comparison board server failed to start. I've shown the variants above. Which do you prefer? Any feedback?"

After receiving feedback (any path): Output a clear summary confirming what was understood:

"Here's what I understood from your feedback: PREFERRED: Variant [X] RATINGS: [list] YOUR NOTES: [comments] DIRECTION: [overall]

Is this right?"

Use AskUserQuestion to verify before proceeding.

Save the approved choice:

echo '{"approved_variant":"<V>","feedback":"<FB>","date":"'$(date -u +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ)'","screen":"<SCREEN>","branch":"'$(git branch --show-current 2>/dev/null)'"}' > "$_DESIGN_DIR/approved.json"

Step 5: Feedback Confirmation

After receiving feedback (via HTTP POST or AskUserQuestion fallback), output a clear summary confirming what was understood:

"Here's what I understood from your feedback:

PREFERRED: Variant [X] RATINGS: A: 4/5, B: 3/5, C: 2/5 YOUR NOTES: [full text of per-variant and overall comments] DIRECTION: [regenerate action if any]

Is this right?"

Use AskUserQuestion to confirm before saving.

Step 6: Save & Next Steps

Write approved.json to $_DESIGN_DIR/ (handled by the loop above).

If invoked from another skill: return the structured feedback for that skill to consume. The calling skill reads approved.json and the approved variant PNG.

If standalone, offer next steps via AskUserQuestion:

"Design direction locked in. What's next? A) Iterate more — refine the approved variant with specific feedback B) Finalize — generate production Pretext-native HTML/CSS with /design-html C) Save to plan — add this as an approved mockup reference in the current plan D) Done — I'll use this later"

Important Rules

1. Never save to .context/, docs/designs/, or /tmp/. All design artifacts go to ~/.vibestack/projects/$SLUG/designs/. This is enforced. See DESIGN_SETUP above.
2. Show variants inline before opening the board. The user should see designs immediately in their terminal. The browser board is for detailed feedback.
3. Confirm feedback before saving. Always summarize what you understood and verify.
4. Taste memory is automatic. Prior approved designs inform new generations by default.
5. Two rounds max on context gathering. Don't over-interrogate. Proceed with assumptions.
6. DESIGN.md is the default constraint. Unless the user says otherwise.