@3fn/core 14.0.0 → 15.0.0

package/dist/consumer-canonical/skills/impeccable/reference/critique.md

@@ -0,0 +1,245 @@
+### Purpose
+
+Resolve one stable target, run two independent assessments, synthesize a design critique, persist a snapshot, and ask the user what to improve next. The chat response is the primary deliverable; the snapshot is an archive/backlog for future commands.
+
+### Hard Invariants
+
+- Assessment A (design review) is always required.
+- Assessment B (detector evidence) is an optional enhancement that strengthens the critique when available.
+- Assessment A must finish before detector findings enter the synthesis context. Detector output is deterministic, but it still anchors judgment.
+- If sub-agents are unavailable, fall back sequentially: finish Assessment A first, then run Assessment B if detector is available, then synthesize.
+- A skipped detector does NOT invalidate the critique. A critique without detector evidence is still a valid critique; one with detector evidence has stronger objectivity.
+- Viewable targets benefit from browser inspection when available.
+
+### Setup: Resolve Target and Load Ignore List
+
+Before gathering assessments, do two small bookkeeping steps. They cost almost nothing and they're what makes critique iterative across runs.
+
+1. **Resolve the primary artifact.** The user's phrasing ("the homepage", "the pricing flow") is not stable enough to track across runs. Resolve it to a concrete file path or URL: the same one you'd already need to scan code or open in a browser. Examples:
+   - "the homepage" → `site/pages/index.astro` (or `http://localhost:3000/` if you're inspecting live)
+   - "the settings modal" → the primary component file (e.g., `src/components/Settings.tsx`)
+   - "this page" → the URL or the page's source file
+   Prefer the source file path over the dev-server URL when both exist; ports drift between runs (`bun dev` vs `bun preview`), file paths don't.
+
+2. **Compute the slug.** Run:
+   ```bash
+   node .kiro/skills/impeccable/scripts/critique-storage.mjs slug "<resolved-path-or-url>"
+   ```
+   Keep the printed slug. It identifies this target's stream across runs. If the command exits non-zero ("no stable slug for input"), skip persistence for this run and tell the user; the trend won't update but the critique still goes ahead.
+
+3. **Read the ignore list** at `.impeccable/critique/ignore.md` if it exists. Plain markdown; each non-empty, non-comment line is something the user has marked as "do not re-raise" (deferred tradeoffs, designer-intended deviations, detector false-positives the user accepts). When a finding's text matches a line here (case-insensitive substring against rule name or snippet), **drop it silently**. Do not mention it in the report. This is the ONLY input critique consumes from prior runs; anchoring on prior findings would defeat the point of independent assessment.
+
+### Gather Assessments
+
+Launch two independent assessments. **Neither may see the other's output.** This isolation is what makes the combined score honest. Running both in one head silently anchors them to each other; do not shortcut it for cost, speed, or context-size reasons.
+
+Delegate each assessment to a separate sub-agent (Claude Code's `Agent` tool, Codex's subagent spawning, etc.). Each returns structured findings as text. Do NOT output findings to the user yet.
+
+Fall back to sequential in-head work only if the environment genuinely cannot spawn sub-agents.
+
+**Tab isolation**: When browser automation is available, each assessment MUST create its own new tab. Never reuse an existing tab, even if one is already open at the correct URL. This prevents the two assessments from interfering with each other's page state.
+
+#### Assessment A: LLM Design Review
+
+Read the relevant source files (HTML, CSS, JS/TS) and, if browser automation is available, visually inspect the live page. **Create a new tab** for this; do not reuse existing tabs. After navigation, label the tab by setting the document title:
+```javascript
+document.title = '[LLM] ' + document.title;
+```
+Think like a design director. Evaluate:
+
+**AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)**: Does this look like every other AI-generated interface? Review against ALL **DON'T** guidelines from the parent impeccable skill (already loaded in this context). Check for AI color palette, gradient text, dark glows, glassmorphism, hero metric layouts, identical card grids, generic fonts, and all other tells. **The test**: If someone said "AI made this," would you believe them immediately?
+
+**Holistic Design Review**: visual hierarchy (eye flow, primary action clarity), information architecture (structure, grouping, cognitive load), emotional resonance (does it match brand and audience?), discoverability (are interactive elements obvious?), composition (balance, whitespace, rhythm), typography (hierarchy, readability, font choices), color (purposeful use, cohesion, accessibility), states & edge cases (empty, loading, error, success), microcopy (clarity, tone, helpfulness).
+
+**Cognitive Load** (consult [cognitive-load](cognitive-load.md)):
+- Run the 8-item cognitive load checklist. Report failure count: 0-1 = low (good), 2-3 = moderate, 4+ = critical.
+- Count visible options at each decision point. If >4, flag it.
+- Check for progressive disclosure: is complexity revealed only when needed?
+
+**Emotional Journey**:
+- What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
+- **Peak-end rule**: Is the most intense moment positive? Does the experience end well?
+- **Emotional valleys**: Check for anxiety spikes at high-stakes moments (payment, delete, commit). Are there design interventions (progress indicators, reassurance copy, undo options)?
+
+**Nielsen's Heuristics** (consult [heuristics-scoring](heuristics-scoring.md)):
+Score each of the 10 heuristics 0-4. This scoring will be presented in the report.
+
+Return structured findings covering: AI slop verdict, heuristic scores, cognitive load assessment, what's working (2-3 items), priority issues (3-5 with what/why/fix), minor observations, and provocative questions.
+
+#### Assessment B: Automated Detection (Optional Enhancement)
+
+Run the bundled deterministic detector when available. Assessment B strengthens the critique with objective evidence but is not required for a valid critique.
+
+**CLI scan**:
+```bash
+node .kiro/skills/impeccable/scripts/detect.mjs --json [target]
+```
+
+- Pass HTML/markup files or directories as `[target]`. Do not pass CSS-only files.
+- Exit code 0 = clean; 2 = findings.
+- If the detector entrypoint is missing or fails to load, skip Assessment B and proceed with Assessment A only.
+- Filter results against `detector-exclusions.md` (exclude rules that conflict with intentional DesignerPunk patterns).
+
+**Browser visualization** (optional): When browser automation is available AND the target is a viewable page, the overlay provides a visual aid for the user highlighting issues directly in their browser.
+
+Return: CLI findings (JSON) if detector was run, any false positives noted, and whether browser visualization was attempted.
+
+### Generate Combined Critique Report
+
+Synthesize both assessments into a single report. Do NOT simply concatenate. Weave the findings together, noting where the LLM review and detector agree, where the detector caught issues the LLM missed, and where detector findings are false positives.
+
+Structure your feedback as a design director would:
+
+#### Design Health Score
+> *Consult [heuristics-scoring](heuristics-scoring.md)*
+
+Present the Nielsen's 10 heuristics scores as a table:
+
+| # | Heuristic | Score | Key Issue |
+|---|-----------|-------|-----------|
+| 1 | Visibility of System Status | ? | [specific finding or "n/a" if solid] |
+| 2 | Match System / Real World | ? | |
+| 3 | User Control and Freedom | ? | |
+| 4 | Consistency and Standards | ? | |
+| 5 | Error Prevention | ? | |
+| 6 | Recognition Rather Than Recall | ? | |
+| 7 | Flexibility and Efficiency | ? | |
+| 8 | Aesthetic and Minimalist Design | ? | |
+| 9 | Error Recovery | ? | |
+| 10 | Help and Documentation | ? | |
+| **Total** | | **??/40** | **[Rating band]** |
+
+Be honest with scores. A 4 means genuinely excellent. Most real interfaces score 20-32.
+
+#### Anti-Patterns Verdict
+
+**Start here.** Does this look AI-generated?
+
+**LLM assessment**: Your own evaluation of AI slop tells. Cover overall aesthetic feel, layout sameness, generic composition, missed opportunities for personality.
+
+**Deterministic scan**: If the detector was run, summarize what it found with counts and file locations. Note any additional issues the detector caught that you missed, and flag any false positives. If the detector was not run, state "Detector not run for this critique" and rely on the LLM assessment alone.
+
+**Visual overlays** (if browser visualization was used): Summarize what the overlay highlighted. If browser visualization was not attempted, omit this section.
+
+#### Overall Impression
+A brief gut reaction: what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.
+
+#### What's Working
+Highlight 2-3 things done well. Be specific about why they work.
+
+#### Priority Issues
+The 3-5 most impactful design problems, ordered by importance.
+
+For each issue, tag with **P0-P3 severity** (consult [heuristics-scoring](heuristics-scoring.md) for severity definitions):
+- **[P?] What**: Name the problem clearly
+- **Why it matters**: How this hurts users or undermines goals
+- **Fix**: What to do about it (be concrete)
+- **Suggested command**: Which command could address this (from: /impeccable adapt, /impeccable animate, /impeccable audit, /impeccable bolder, /impeccable clarify, /impeccable colorize, /impeccable critique, /impeccable delight, /impeccable distill, /impeccable document, /impeccable harden, /impeccable layout, /impeccable onboard, /impeccable optimize, /impeccable overdrive, /impeccable polish, /impeccable quieter, /impeccable shape, /impeccable typeset)
+
+#### Persona Red Flags
+> *Consult [personas](personas.md)*
+
+Auto-select 2-3 personas most relevant to this interface type (use the selection table in the reference). If brand context is available via `get_brand_context()`, also generate 1-2 project-specific personas from the audience/brand info.
+
+For each selected persona, walk through the primary user action and list specific red flags found:
+
+**Alex (Power User)**: No keyboard shortcuts detected. Form requires 8 clicks for primary action. Forced modal onboarding. High abandonment risk.
+
+**Jordan (First-Timer)**: Icon-only nav in sidebar. Technical jargon in error messages ("404 Not Found"). No visible help. Will abandon at step 2.
+
+Be specific. Name the exact elements and interactions that fail each persona. Don't write generic persona descriptions; write what broke for them.
+
+#### Minor Observations
+Quick notes on smaller issues worth addressing.
+
+#### Questions to Consider
+Provocative questions that might unlock better solutions:
+- "What if the primary action were more prominent?"
+- "Does this need to feel this complex?"
+- "What would a confident version of this look like?"
+
+**Remember**:
+- Be direct. Vague feedback wastes everyone's time.
+- Be specific. "The submit button," not "some elements."
+- Say what's wrong AND why it matters to users.
+- Give concrete suggestions. Cut "consider exploring..." entirely.
+- Prioritize ruthlessly. If everything is important, nothing is.
+- Don't soften criticism. Developers need honest feedback to ship great design.
+
+### Persist the Snapshot
+
+Once the report above is finalized, write it to `.impeccable/critique/` so the user can refer back, and so `/impeccable polish` can pick up the priority issues without a copy-paste.
+
+Skip this step if the Setup slug was null (vague or root-level target).
+
+1. **Write the body to a temp file** so you can pipe it to the helper. Use the full report (heuristic table, anti-patterns verdict, priority issues, persona red flags) but stop before the "Ask the User" / "Recommended Actions" sections that come later.
+
+2. **Pass the structured metadata** through `IMPECCABLE_CRITIQUE_META` (JSON), then run the write command:
+   ```bash
+   IMPECCABLE_CRITIQUE_META='{"target":"<user phrasing>","total_score":<n>,"p0_count":<n>,"p1_count":<n>}' \
+     node .kiro/skills/impeccable/scripts/critique-storage.mjs write <slug> <body-file>
+   ```
+   The helper prints the absolute path it wrote.
+
+3. **Read the trend** for context:
+   ```bash
+   node .kiro/skills/impeccable/scripts/critique-storage.mjs trend <slug> 5
+   ```
+   This returns a JSON array of the last 5 frontmatter entries (including the one you just wrote).
+
+4. **Append a single line to the user-visible output**, after the report and before the questions:
+
+   > **Trend for `<slug>` (last 5 runs): 24 → 28 → 32 → 29 → 32**
+   > Wrote `.impeccable/critique/<filename>`.
+
+   If this is the first run for the slug, the trend is just one score; say so: "First run for this target, no trend yet."
+
+This is fire-and-forget. Do not show the user the helper's JSON output; only the human-readable trend line and the written path. Failures here should not block the rest of the flow; print the error and move on.
+
+### Ask the User
+
+**After presenting findings**, use targeted questions based on what was actually found. ask the user directly to clarify what you cannot infer. These answers will shape the action plan.
+
+Ask questions along these lines (adapt to the specific findings; do NOT ask generic questions):
+
+1. **Priority direction**: Based on the issues found, ask which category matters most to the user right now. For example: "I found problems with visual hierarchy, color usage, and information overload. Which area should we tackle first?" Offer the top 2-3 issue categories as options.
+
+2. **Design intent**: If the critique found a tonal mismatch, ask whether it was intentional. For example: "The interface feels clinical and corporate. Is that the intended tone, or should it feel warmer/bolder/more playful?" Offer 2-3 tonal directions as options based on what would fix the issues found.
+
+3. **Scope**: Ask how much the user wants to take on. For example: "I found N issues. Want to address everything, or focus on the top 3?" Offer scope options like "Top 3 only", "All issues", "Critical issues only".
+
+4. **Constraints** (optional; only ask if relevant): If the findings touch many areas, ask if anything is off-limits. For example: "Should any sections stay as-is?" This prevents the plan from touching things the user considers done.
+
+**Rules for questions**:
+- Every question must reference specific findings from the report. Never ask generic "who is your audience?" questions.
+- Keep it to 2-4 questions maximum. Respect the user's time.
+- Offer concrete options, not open-ended prompts.
+- If findings are straightforward (e.g., only 1-2 clear issues), skip questions and go directly to Recommended Actions.
+
+### Recommended Actions
+
+**After receiving the user's answers**, present a prioritized action summary reflecting the user's priorities and scope from Ask the User.
+
+#### Action Summary
+
+List recommended commands in priority order, based on the user's answers:
+
+1. **`/command-name`**: Brief description of what to fix (specific context from critique findings)
+2. **`/command-name`**: Brief description (specific context)
+...
+
+**Rules for recommendations**:
+- Only recommend commands from: /impeccable adapt, /impeccable animate, /impeccable audit, /impeccable bolder, /impeccable clarify, /impeccable colorize, /impeccable critique, /impeccable delight, /impeccable distill, /impeccable document, /impeccable harden, /impeccable layout, /impeccable onboard, /impeccable optimize, /impeccable overdrive, /impeccable polish, /impeccable quieter, /impeccable shape, /impeccable typeset
+- Order by the user's stated priorities first, then by impact
+- Each item's description should carry enough context that the command knows what to focus on
+- Map each Priority Issue to the appropriate command
+- Skip commands that would address zero issues
+- If the user chose a limited scope, only include items within that scope
+- If the user marked areas as off-limits, exclude commands that would touch those areas
+- End with `/impeccable polish` as the final step if any fixes were recommended
+
+After presenting the summary, tell the user:
+
+> You can ask me to run these one at a time, all at once, or in any order you prefer.
+>
+> Re-run `/impeccable critique` after fixes to see your score improve.

package/dist/consumer-canonical/skills/impeccable/reference/delight.md

@@ -0,0 +1,302 @@
+> **Additional context needed**: what's appropriate for the domain (playful vs professional vs quirky vs elegant).
+
+Find the moments where personality and unexpected polish would turn a functional interface into one users remember and tell other people about. Add only where the moment earns it; delight everywhere reads as noise.
+
+---
+
+## Register
+
+Brand: delight can be distributed across copy voice, section transitions, discovery rewards, seasonal touches, personality across the whole surface.
+
+Product: delight at specific moments, not pages. Completion, first-time actions, error recovery, milestone crossings. Reliability and consistency carry the rest of the experience; delight pushed everywhere reads as noise.
+
+---
+
+## Assess Delight Opportunities
+
+Identify where delight would enhance (not distract from) the experience:
+
+1. **Find natural delight moments**:
+   - **Success states**: Completed actions (save, send, publish)
+   - **Empty states**: First-time experiences, onboarding
+   - **Loading states**: Waiting periods that could be entertaining
+   - **Achievements**: Milestones, streaks, completions
+   - **Interactions**: Hover states, clicks, drags
+   - **Errors**: Softening frustrating moments
+   - **Easter eggs**: Hidden discoveries for curious users
+
+2. **Understand the context**:
+   - What's the brand personality? (Playful? Professional? Quirky? Elegant?)
+   - Who's the audience? (Tech-savvy? Creative? Corporate?)
+   - What's the emotional context? (Accomplishment? Exploration? Frustration?)
+   - What's appropriate? (Banking app ≠ gaming app)
+
+3. **Define delight strategy**:
+   - **Subtle sophistication**: Refined micro-interactions (luxury brands)
+   - **Playful personality**: Whimsical illustrations and copy (consumer apps)
+   - **Helpful surprises**: Anticipating needs before users ask (productivity tools)
+   - **Sensory richness**: Satisfying sounds, smooth animations (creative tools)
+
+If any of these are unclear from the codebase, ask the user directly to clarify what you cannot infer.
+
+**CRITICAL**: Delight should enhance usability, never obscure it. If users notice the delight more than accomplishing their goal, you've gone too far.
+
+## Delight Principles
+
+Follow these guidelines:
+
+### Delight Amplifies, Never Blocks
+- Delight moments should be quick (< 1 second)
+- Never delay core functionality for delight
+- Make delight skippable or subtle
+- Respect user's time and task focus
+
+### Surprise and Discovery
+- Hide delightful details for users to discover
+- Reward exploration and curiosity
+- Don't announce every delight moment
+- Let users share discoveries with others
+
+### Appropriate to Context
+- Match delight to emotional moment (celebrate success, empathize with errors)
+- Respect the user's state (don't be playful during critical errors)
+- Match brand personality and audience expectations
+- Cultural sensitivity (what's delightful varies by culture)
+
+### Compound Over Time
+- Delight should remain fresh with repeated use
+- Vary responses (not same animation every time)
+- Reveal deeper layers with continued use
+- Build anticipation through patterns
+
+## Delight Techniques
+
+Add personality and joy through these methods:
+
+### Micro-interactions & Animation
+
+**Button delight**:
+```css
+/* Satisfying button press */
+.button {
+  transition: transform 0.1s, box-shadow 0.1s;
+}
+.button:active {
+  transform: translateY(2px);
+  box-shadow: 0 2px 4px rgba(0,0,0,0.2);
+}
+
+/* Ripple effect on click */
+/* Smooth lift on hover */
+.button:hover {
+  transform: translateY(-2px);
+  transition: transform 0.2s cubic-bezier(0.25, 1, 0.5, 1); /* ease-out-quart */
+}
+```
+
+**Loading delight**:
+- Playful loading animations (not just spinners)
+- Personality in loading messages (write product-specific ones, not generic AI filler)
+- Progress indication with encouraging messages
+- Skeleton screens with subtle animations
+
+**Success animations**:
+- Checkmark draw animation
+- Confetti burst for major achievements
+- Gentle scale + fade for confirmation
+- Satisfying sound effects (subtle)
+
+**Hover surprises**:
+- Icons that animate on hover
+- Color shifts or glow effects
+- Tooltip reveals with personality
+- Cursor changes (custom cursors for branded experiences)
+
+### Personality in Copy
+
+**Playful error messages**:
+```
+"Error 404"
+"This page is playing hide and seek. (And winning)"
+
+"Connection failed"
+"Looks like the internet took a coffee break. Want to retry?"
+```
+
+**Encouraging empty states**:
+```
+"No projects"
+"Your canvas awaits. Create something amazing."
+
+"No messages"
+"Inbox zero! You're crushing it today."
+```
+
+**Playful labels & tooltips**:
+```
+"Delete"
+"Send to void" (for playful brand)
+
+"Help"
+"Rescue me" (tooltip)
+```
+
+**IMPORTANT**: Match copy personality to brand. Banks shouldn't be wacky, but they can be warm.
+
+### Illustrations & Visual Personality
+
+**Custom illustrations**:
+- Empty state illustrations (not stock icons)
+- Error state illustrations (friendly monsters, quirky characters)
+- Loading state illustrations (animated characters)
+- Success state illustrations (celebrations)
+
+**Icon personality**:
+- Custom icon set matching brand personality
+- Animated icons (subtle motion on hover/click)
+- Illustrative icons (more detailed than generic)
+- Consistent style across all icons
+
+**Background effects**:
+- Subtle particle effects
+- Gradient mesh backgrounds
+- Geometric patterns
+- Parallax depth
+- Time-of-day themes (morning vs night)
+
+### Satisfying Interactions
+
+**Drag and drop delight**:
+- Lift effect on drag (shadow, scale)
+- Snap animation when dropped
+- Satisfying placement sound
+- Undo toast ("Dropped in wrong place? [Undo]")
+
+**Toggle switches**:
+- Smooth slide with spring physics
+- Color transition
+- Haptic feedback on mobile
+- Optional sound effect
+
+**Progress & achievements**:
+- Streak counters with celebratory milestones
+- Progress bars that "celebrate" at 100%
+- Badge unlocks with animation
+- Playful stats ("You're on fire! 5 days in a row")
+
+**Form interactions**:
+- Input fields that animate on focus
+- Checkboxes with a satisfying scale pulse when checked
+- Success state that celebrates valid input
+- Auto-grow textareas
+
+### Sound Design
+
+**Subtle audio cues** (when appropriate):
+- Notification sounds (distinctive but not annoying)
+- Success sounds (satisfying "ding")
+- Error sounds (empathetic, not harsh)
+- Typing sounds for chat/messaging
+- Ambient background audio (very subtle)
+
+**IMPORTANT**:
+- Respect system sound settings
+- Provide mute option
+- Keep volumes quiet (subtle cues, not alarms)
+- Don't play on every interaction (sound fatigue is real)
+
+### Easter Eggs & Hidden Delights
+
+**Discovery rewards**:
+- Konami code unlocks special theme
+- Hidden keyboard shortcuts (Cmd+K for special features)
+- Hover reveals on logos or illustrations
+- Alt text jokes on images (for screen reader users too!)
+- Console messages for developers ("Like what you see? We're hiring!")
+
+**Seasonal touches**:
+- Holiday themes (subtle, tasteful)
+- Seasonal color shifts
+- Weather-based variations
+- Time-based changes (dark at night, light during day)
+
+**Contextual personality**:
+- Different messages based on time of day
+- Responses to specific user actions
+- Randomized variations (not same every time)
+- Progressive reveals with continued use
+
+### Loading & Waiting States
+
+**Make waiting engaging**:
+- Interesting loading messages that rotate
+- Progress bars with personality
+- Mini-games during long loads
+- Fun facts or tips while waiting
+- Countdown with encouraging messages
+
+```
+Loading messages: write ones specific to your product, not generic AI filler:
+- "Crunching your latest numbers..."
+- "Syncing with your team's changes..."
+- "Preparing your dashboard..."
+- "Checking for updates since yesterday..."
+```
+
+**WARNING**: Avoid cliched loading messages like "Herding pixels", "Teaching robots to dance", "Consulting the magic 8-ball", "Counting backwards from infinity". These are AI-slop copy, instantly recognizable as machine-generated. Write messages that are specific to what your product actually does.
+
+### Celebration Moments
+
+**Success celebrations**:
+- Confetti for major milestones
+- Animated checkmarks for completions
+- Progress bar celebrations at 100%
+- "Achievement unlocked" style notifications
+- Personalized messages ("You published your 10th article!")
+
+**Milestone recognition**:
+- First-time actions get special treatment
+- Streak tracking and celebration
+- Progress toward goals
+- Anniversary celebrations
+
+## Implementation Patterns
+
+**Animation libraries**:
+- Framer Motion (React)
+- GSAP (universal)
+- Lottie (After Effects animations)
+- Canvas confetti (party effects)
+
+**Sound libraries**:
+- Howler.js (audio management)
+- Use-sound (React hook)
+
+**Physics libraries**:
+- React Spring (spring physics)
+- Popmotion (animation primitives)
+
+**IMPORTANT**: File size matters. Compress images, optimize animations, lazy load delight features.
+
+**NEVER**:
+- Delay core functionality for delight
+- Force users through delightful moments (make skippable)
+- Use delight to hide poor UX
+- Overdo it (less is more)
+- Ignore accessibility (animate responsibly, provide alternatives)
+- Make every interaction delightful (special moments should be special)
+- Sacrifice performance for delight
+- Be inappropriate for context (read the room)
+
+## Verify Delight Quality
+
+Test that delight actually delights:
+
+- **User reactions**: Do users smile? Share screenshots?
+- **Doesn't annoy**: Still pleasant after 100th time?
+- **Doesn't block**: Can users opt out or skip?
+- **Performant**: No jank, no slowdown
+- **Appropriate**: Matches brand and context
+- **Accessible**: Works with reduced motion, screen readers
+
+When the moments feel earned, hand off to `/impeccable polish` for the final pass.

package/dist/consumer-canonical/skills/impeccable/reference/distill.md

@@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
+Strip a design to its essence. Remove anything that doesn't earn its place: redundant elements, repeated information, decorative noise, cosmetic complexity.
+
+
+---
+
+## Assess Current State
+
+Analyze what makes the design feel complex or cluttered:
+
+1. **Identify complexity sources**:
+   - **Too many elements**: Competing buttons, redundant information, visual clutter
+   - **Excessive variation**: Too many colors, fonts, sizes, styles without purpose
+   - **Information overload**: Everything visible at once, no progressive disclosure
+   - **Visual noise**: Unnecessary borders, shadows, backgrounds, decorations
+   - **Confusing hierarchy**: Unclear what matters most
+   - **Feature creep**: Too many options, actions, or paths forward
+
+2. **Find the essence**:
+   - What's the primary user goal? (There should be ONE)
+   - What's actually necessary vs nice-to-have?
+   - What can be removed, hidden, or combined?
+   - What's the 20% that delivers 80% of value?
+
+If any of these are unclear from the codebase, ask the user directly to clarify what you cannot infer.
+
+**CRITICAL**: Simplicity is not about removing features. It's about removing obstacles between users and their goals. Every element should justify its existence.
+
+## Plan Simplification
+
+Create a ruthless editing strategy:
+
+- **Core purpose**: What's the ONE thing this should accomplish?
+- **Essential elements**: What's truly necessary to achieve that purpose?
+- **Progressive disclosure**: What can be hidden until needed?
+- **Consolidation opportunities**: What can be combined or integrated?
+
+**IMPORTANT**: Simplification is hard. It requires saying no to good ideas to make room for great execution. Be ruthless.
+
+## Simplify the Design
+
+Systematically remove complexity across these dimensions:
+
+### Information Architecture
+- **Reduce scope**: Remove secondary actions, optional features, redundant information
+- **Progressive disclosure**: Hide complexity behind clear entry points (accordions, modals, step-through flows)
+- **Combine related actions**: Merge similar buttons, consolidate forms, group related content
+- **Clear hierarchy**: ONE primary action, few secondary actions, everything else tertiary or hidden
+- **Remove redundancy**: If it's said elsewhere, don't repeat it here
+
+### Visual Simplification
+- **Reduce color palette**: Use 1-2 colors plus neutrals, not 5-7 colors
+- **Limit typography**: One font family, 3-4 sizes maximum, 2-3 weights
+- **Remove decorations**: Eliminate borders, shadows, backgrounds that don't serve hierarchy or function
+- **Flatten structure**: Reduce nesting, remove unnecessary containers; never nest cards inside cards
+- **Remove unnecessary cards**: Cards aren't needed for basic layout; use spacing and alignment instead
+- **Consistent spacing**: Use one spacing scale, remove arbitrary gaps
+
+### Layout Simplification
+- **Linear flow**: Replace complex grids with simple vertical flow where possible
+- **Remove sidebars**: Move secondary content inline or hide it
+- **Full-width**: Use available space generously instead of complex multi-column layouts
+- **Consistent alignment**: Pick left or center, stick with it
+- **Generous white space**: Let content breathe, don't pack everything tight
+
+### Interaction Simplification
+- **Reduce choices**: Fewer buttons, fewer options, clearer path forward (paradox of choice is real)
+- **Smart defaults**: Make common choices automatic, only ask when necessary
+- **Inline actions**: Replace modal flows with inline editing where possible
+- **Remove steps**: Can signup be one step instead of three? Can checkout be simplified?
+- **Clear CTAs**: ONE obvious next step, not five competing actions
+
+### Content Simplification
+- **Shorter copy**: Cut every sentence in half, then do it again
+- **Active voice**: "Save changes" not "Changes will be saved"
+- **Remove jargon**: Plain language always wins
+- **Scannable structure**: Short paragraphs, bullet points, clear headings
+- **Essential information only**: Remove marketing fluff, legalese, hedging
+- **Remove redundant copy**: No headers restating intros, no repeated explanations, say it once
+
+### Code Simplification
+- **Remove unused code**: Dead CSS, unused components, orphaned files
+- **Flatten component trees**: Reduce nesting depth
+- **Consolidate styles**: Merge similar styles, use utilities consistently
+- **Reduce variants**: Does that component need 12 variations, or can 3 cover 90% of cases?
+
+**NEVER**:
+- Remove necessary functionality (simplicity ≠ feature-less)
+- Sacrifice accessibility for simplicity (clear labels and ARIA still required)
+- Make things so simple they're unclear (mystery ≠ minimalism)
+- Remove information users need to make decisions
+- Eliminate hierarchy completely (some things should stand out)
+- Oversimplify complex domains (match complexity to actual task complexity)
+
+## Verify Simplification
+
+Ensure simplification improves usability:
+
+- **Faster task completion**: Can users accomplish goals more quickly?
+- **Reduced cognitive load**: Is it easier to understand what to do?
+- **Still complete**: Are all necessary features still accessible?
+- **Clearer hierarchy**: Is it obvious what matters most?
+- **Better performance**: Does simpler design load faster?
+
+## Document Removed Complexity
+
+If you removed features or options:
+- Document why they were removed
+- Consider if they need alternative access points
+- Note any user feedback to monitor
+
+When the cuts feel right, hand off to `/impeccable polish` for the final pass. As Antoine de Saint-Exupéry put it: "Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."