@tangle-network/browser-agent-driver 0.12.1 → 0.13.0

package/dist/cli-design-audit.js

@@ -14,224 +14,8 @@ import { PlaywrightDriver } from './drivers/playwright.js';
 import { resolveProviderApiKey, resolveProviderModelName } from './provider-defaults.js';
 import { loadLocalEnvFiles } from './env-loader.js';
 import { cliError } from './cli-ui.js';
-// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-// Audit profiles — domain-specific rubrics injected into the system prompt
-// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-const PROFILE_RUBRICS = {
-    general: `
-CALIBRATION — be ruthlessly honest:
-- 9-10: Only world-class design (Linear, Stripe, Vercel). Exceptional typography, spacing, micro-interactions.
-- 7-8: Professional and polished. Minor inconsistencies tolerated if the overall system is coherent.
-- 5-6: Functional but clearly lacks design investment. Default component libraries with no customization.
-- 3-4: Noticeably broken or amateurish. Inconsistent spacing, clashing colors, poor hierarchy.
-- 1-2: Unusable or visually broken. Overlapping elements, unreadable text, broken layouts.
-
-Most production apps score 5-7. Very few deserve 8+. Do NOT grade on a curve.`,
-    saas: `
-SaaS APPLICATION AUDIT — evaluate as a paying customer would:
-- Information density: is data presented efficiently without clutter?
-- Navigation: can I find features in <3 clicks? Is the sidebar/nav intuitive?
-- Empty states: what happens with no data? Are there helpful onboarding prompts?
-- Loading states: are there skeleton screens or spinners, or does content pop in?
-- Form design: inline validation? Clear labels? Logical tab order?
-- Dashboard layout: is the most important data prominent? Card hierarchy clear?
-- Error states: are errors actionable with clear recovery paths?
-- Consistency: do buttons, inputs, modals follow the same patterns throughout?
-
-CALIBRATION: Linear, Notion, Figma = 9. Generic admin templates = 5. Broken CRUD apps = 3.`,
-    defi: `
-DeFi/CRYPTO APPLICATION AUDIT — evaluate as a trader managing real money:
-- Trust signals: does the UI feel safe to connect a wallet to? Professional or sketchy?
-- Token displays: are balances formatted correctly? Right decimal places? USD equivalents?
-- Transaction clarity: is it clear what you're signing? Amount, fees, slippage shown?
-- Loading states: RPC calls are slow — are there proper loading indicators for balances, quotes, gas estimates?
-- Mobile responsiveness: most DeFi usage is mobile — does it work on small viewports?
-- Dark mode: most DeFi apps use dark mode — is contrast sufficient? Are borders visible?
-- Error handling: what happens when RPC fails? Wallet rejects? Insufficient balance?
-- Swap UX: is token selection intuitive? Can you paste addresses? Is the price impact shown?
-- Wallet connection: is the connect flow smooth? Are supported wallets clearly shown?
-- Gas/fee transparency: are gas estimates shown before confirmation?
-
-CALIBRATION: Uniswap v4, Aave v3 = 8. Average DEX = 5. Rug-pull-looking sites = 2.
-Uniswap is good but not perfect — dense token lists, some spacing issues, swap review could be clearer.`,
-    marketing: `
-MARKETING/LANDING PAGE AUDIT — evaluate as a potential customer deciding in 10 seconds:
-- Hero clarity: in 5 seconds, can I tell what this product does and who it's for?
-- Visual hierarchy: does the eye flow naturally from headline → subtext → CTA?
-- CTA prominence: is the primary call-to-action obvious and compelling?
-- Social proof: are testimonials, logos, or metrics shown convincingly?
-- Typography: is the headline typography impactful? Body text readable?
-- Imagery: are images/illustrations high quality and relevant, or stock photo generic?
-- Whitespace: does the page breathe, or is it cramped?
-- Mobile: does the hero and CTA work on mobile without scrolling?
-- Performance perception: does it feel fast? Are images optimized? No layout shift?
-- Footer: is navigation complete? Legal links present?
-
-CALIBRATION: Stripe, Linear, Vercel = 9. Average startup landing page = 5. Template sites = 3.`,
-    vibecoded: `
-VIBECODED / AI-GENERATED APP AUDIT — evaluate as a design-literate user who can smell defaults:
-
-TEMPLATE DETECTION (the #1 sin of vibecoded apps):
-- Is this clearly an unmodified shadcn/ui, MUI, Ant Design, or Chakra template? Score ceiling: 4 if yes.
-- Default border-radius (6-8px shadcn, 4px MUI), default color palette (zinc/slate grays, blue-600 primary)?
-- Default component spacing with no customization? Standard card shadows? Stock empty states?
-- "Looks like every other AI-generated app" = automatic 3-4 score.
-
-HIERARCHY & INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE:
-- Is everything the same visual weight? (Common AI pattern: all cards same size, no primary/secondary distinction)
-- Is there clear information hierarchy? Primary action vs secondary vs tertiary?
-- Does the layout have purpose or is it "centered column of cards" (the AI default)?
-- Navigation: is it a dumped list of features or thoughtfully organized?
-
-DESIGN SYSTEM COHERENCE:
-- Are there more than 3 distinct border-radius values? (Incoherent)
-- Color palette: intentional and limited (4-6 colors) or random accumulation?
-- Spacing: consistent rhythm on an 8px grid, or arbitrary per-component?
-- Typography: deliberate scale with 3-4 sizes, or every component picking its own?
-- Are interactive states (hover, focus, active, disabled) designed or browser-default?
-
-CRAFT SIGNALS (what separates 7 from 9):
-- Custom icons or generic Lucide/Heroicons dump?
-- Micro-interactions: button press feedback, page transitions, loading skeletons?
-- Empty states: designed illustrations or "No data found" text?
-- Error states: helpful messages with recovery actions or raw error strings?
-- Dark mode (if present): properly designed or just "invert colors"?
-- Content-first: does real content drive the layout, or is it a container waiting for content?
-
-AGENTIC APP SPECIFICS:
-- Agent status indicators: is it clear what the agent is doing? Progress feedback?
-- Streaming/loading: smooth token streaming or janky text replacement?
-- Conversation UI: proper message bubbles with timestamps, or plain text dump?
-- Tool call visualization: can the user see what tools the agent used?
-- Error recovery: when the agent fails, is there a clear retry/edit path?
-
-CALIBRATION:
-- 9-10: Custom design system, thoughtful hierarchy, polished interactions (Linear, Cursor, v0.dev)
-- 7-8: Modified template with intentional design decisions, consistent system
-- 5-6: Lightly customized template, functional but generic (most AI-generated apps)
-- 3-4: Unmodified component library, no design investment, "it works" energy
-- 1-2: Broken layout, clashing styles, unusable
-
-Most vibecoded apps score 3-5. The ceiling for unmodified templates is 4 regardless of functionality.`,
-};
-// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-// Upgraded system prompt — much more opinionated than the original
-// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-function buildAuditPrompt(profile) {
-    const rubric = PROFILE_RUBRICS[profile] || PROFILE_RUBRICS.general;
-    return `You are a principal design engineer who has shipped design systems at Linear, Stripe, and Vercel. You review with the precision of a typographer and the ruthlessness of a design director. You have built and maintained production design systems used by millions.
-
-Your job: perform an exhaustive visual design audit of this page. You must be specific enough that a developer could fix every issue from your report alone — reference exact elements, computed values, pixel measurements, and CSS properties.
-
-EVALUATION FRAMEWORK (score each area 1-10, then weight into overall):
-
-1. LAYOUT & GRID (weight: 15%)
-   - Is there a consistent grid system? What grid unit? (4px, 8px, etc.)
-   - Column alignment: do content blocks align to the same left/right edges?
-   - Content width: is max-width appropriate? (prose: 65-75ch, app: fluid with sidebar)
-   - Responsive: does the layout reflow intentionally or just shrink?
-   - Z-index layering: any stacking context issues? Overlapping elements?
-   - Check for: orphaned elements floating outside the grid, inconsistent container padding
-
-2. TYPOGRAPHY SYSTEM (weight: 15%)
-   - Type scale: is there a clear hierarchy? Count distinct font-size values — more than 5-6 suggests no scale.
-   - Line height: body text should be 1.4-1.6, headings 1.1-1.3. Flag violations.
-   - Letter spacing: headings often need negative (-0.01 to -0.03em). Is it tuned?
-   - Font pairing: max 2 families (heading + body). Flag 3+.
-   - Text rendering: are long paragraphs wider than 75ch? That harms readability.
-   - Orphans/widows: any single-word last lines in headings?
-   - Font loading: is there FOUT/FOIT? Font-display strategy?
-
-3. COLOR & CONTRAST (weight: 15%)
-   - WCAG AA compliance: normal text needs 4.5:1, large text (18px+/14px+ bold) needs 3:1. ESTIMATE ratios.
-   - Palette size: count distinct hues. More than 5-6 non-neutral hues = incoherent.
-   - Semantic color usage: is the primary color used consistently for primary actions?
-   - Background layering: do nested surfaces have clear elevation (bg-0, bg-1, bg-2)?
-   - Gray scale: are grays consistent? All blue-gray, or mixed warm/cool? Mixed = incoherent.
-   - Accent usage: are accent colors used sparingly or splashed everywhere?
-
-4. SPACING & RHYTHM (weight: 15%)
-   - Grid adherence: what % of spacing values are multiples of the base unit?
-   - Vertical rhythm: are section gaps consistent? Measure gap between each major section.
-   - Component internal spacing: is padding consistent within similar components (all cards, all inputs)?
-   - Whitespace ratio: is there enough breathing room, or is everything cramped?
-   - Margin collapse issues: any unintended spacing from margin collapse?
-
-5. COMPONENT CONSISTENCY (weight: 15%)
-   - Button variants: how many distinct button styles? Are they intentional variants or accidents?
-   - Input styling: are all form inputs styled consistently? Border, focus ring, label position?
-   - Card patterns: same border-radius, shadow, padding across all cards?
-   - Icon system: consistent size (16/20/24px), stroke width, and style?
-   - Border radius: count distinct values. More than 3 (e.g., 4px, 8px, full) = incoherent.
-   - Shadow system: consistent elevation scale or random drop shadows?
-
-6. INTERACTION DESIGN (weight: 10%)
-   - Hover states: do interactive elements have visible hover feedback?
-   - Focus indicators: are there visible focus rings for keyboard navigation?
-   - Active/pressed states: button feedback on click?
-   - Transitions: are they present? Consistent duration (150-300ms)? Appropriate easing?
-   - Loading states: skeleton screens, spinners, or no loading feedback at all?
-   - Cursor changes: does cursor change to pointer on clickable elements?
-
-7. ACCESSIBILITY (weight: 10%)
-   - Semantic HTML: are headings in order (h1 → h2 → h3)? Are buttons actually <button>?
-   - ARIA labels: do icon-only buttons have labels? Do images have alt text?
-   - Keyboard navigation: can you tell what's focused? Is tab order logical?
-   - Touch targets: are mobile tap targets at least 44x44px?
-   - Screen reader: is content structured so screen reader users get meaningful navigation?
-
-8. VISUAL POLISH (weight: 5%)
-   - Pixel precision: any elements off by 1px? Misaligned text baselines?
-   - Image quality: are images sharp on retina displays (2x resolution)?
-   - Icon consistency: all from the same set, or a mix of styles/weights?
-   - Empty states: designed or raw "no data" text?
-   - Error states: styled or browser-default?
-   - Favicon and meta: present and professional?
-
-${rubric}
-
-SPECIFICITY REQUIREMENTS — your findings must be THIS specific:
-- BAD: "Spacing is inconsistent" (vague, useless)
-- GOOD: "Section gap between hero and features is 48px, but features-to-pricing is 24px and pricing-to-footer is 64px. Use consistent 48px or 64px vertical rhythm throughout."
-- BAD: "Colors don't look right" (vague)
-- GOOD: "Body text (#6b7280) on white background has ~4.6:1 contrast ratio (barely passes AA). The same gray on the light-gray card background (#f9fafb) drops to ~3.8:1 — fails AA for normal text. Darken body text to #4b5563 (7:1+)."
-- BAD: "Typography needs work" (vague)
-- GOOD: "6 distinct font sizes detected (12, 13, 14, 16, 20, 32px) with no clear scale. Consolidate to a 4-step scale: 14px body, 16px large, 24px h2, 36px h1. Current h2 at 20px lacks sufficient contrast with 16px body text."
-
-For EACH finding, you MUST include a concrete CSS fix in the suggestion field. Not "improve spacing" but "gap: 48px" or "font-size: 14px; line-height: 1.5".
-
-RESPOND WITH ONLY a JSON object:
-{
-  "score": 6,
-  "summary": "One-sentence overall assessment with the key design system failure mode",
-  "strengths": ["Specific thing done well with evidence", "Another measured strength"],
-  "findings": [
-    {
-      "category": "spacing",
-      "severity": "major",
-      "description": "Hero section has 64px top padding but only 16px bottom padding before the feature grid, creating visual imbalance. The 4:1 ratio breaks vertical rhythm.",
-      "location": "Hero section → feature grid transition (main > section:nth-child(2))",
-      "suggestion": "padding-bottom: 48px on hero section. Standardize all section gaps to 48px or 64px.",
-      "cssSelector": "main > section:first-child",
-      "cssFix": "padding-bottom: 48px"
-    }
-  ],
-  "designSystemScore": {
-    "layout": 7,
-    "typography": 5,
-    "color": 6,
-    "spacing": 4,
-    "components": 6,
-    "interactions": 3,
-    "accessibility": 5,
-    "polish": 4
-  }
-}
-
-Categories: visual-bug, layout, contrast, alignment, spacing, typography, accessibility, ux
-Severities: critical (blocks usage or fails WCAG), major (looks unprofessional), minor (polish detail)
-Score: 1-10 per calibration above. Most production apps score 5-7. Template apps score 3-5. Only world-class ships get 8+. Be honest — inflated scores help nobody.`;
-}
+import { auditOnePage } from './design/audit/pipeline.js';
+import { detectSystemicFindings, topByRoi } from './design/audit/roi.js';
 // ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 // Page discovery — find key pages by crawling links
 // ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
@@ -282,7 +66,7 @@ async function discoverPages(page, startUrl, maxPages) {
 // ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 // Report generation
 // ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-function generateReport(results, profile) {
+function generateReport(results, profile, topFixes = []) {
     const lines = [];
     const avgScore = results.length > 0
         ? results.reduce((sum, r) => sum + r.score, 0) / results.length
@@ -294,7 +78,18 @@ function generateReport(results, profile) {
     const totalTokens = results.reduce((sum, r) => sum + (r.tokensUsed ?? 0), 0);
     lines.push('# Design Audit Report');
     lines.push('');
-    lines.push(`**Profile:** ${profile}`);
+    if (profile) {
+        lines.push(`**Profile:** ${profile}`);
+    }
+    // Surface per-page classification when present (Gen 2)
+    const classifications = results
+        .filter(r => r.classification)
+        .map(r => `${r.url}: ${r.classification.type}/${r.classification.domain} (${r.classification.maturity})`);
+    if (classifications.length > 0) {
+        lines.push(`**Auto-classified:**`);
+        for (const c of classifications)
+            lines.push(`- ${c}`);
+    }
     lines.push(`**Pages audited:** ${results.length}`);
     lines.push(`**Overall score:** ${avgScore.toFixed(1)}/10`);
     lines.push(`**Findings:** ${allFindings.length} (${critical} critical, ${major} major, ${minor} minor)`);
@@ -305,6 +100,34 @@ function generateReport(results, profile) {
     const scoreBar = '█'.repeat(Math.round(avgScore)) + '░'.repeat(10 - Math.round(avgScore));
     lines.push(`\`${scoreBar}\` ${avgScore.toFixed(1)}/10`);
     lines.push('');
+    // ── Top Fixes (by ROI) — the headline section users actually read first ──
+    if (topFixes.length > 0) {
+        lines.push('## Top Fixes (by ROI)');
+        lines.push('');
+        lines.push('Fix these first — sorted by impact × blast / effort:');
+        lines.push('');
+        for (let i = 0; i < topFixes.length; i++) {
+            const f = topFixes[i];
+            const tags = [];
+            if (f.pageCount && f.pageCount >= 2)
+                tags.push(`appears on ${f.pageCount} pages`);
+            if (f.blast === 'system')
+                tags.push('SYSTEMIC');
+            const tagStr = tags.length > 0 ? ` _(${tags.join(', ')})_` : '';
+            const roiStr = f.roi !== undefined ? f.roi.toFixed(1) : '—';
+            lines.push(`### ${i + 1}. [${f.severity}] ${f.description}${tagStr}`);
+            lines.push('');
+            lines.push(`- **ROI:** ${roiStr}  ·  Impact ${f.impact ?? '—'}  ·  Effort ${f.effort ?? '—'}  ·  Blast ${f.blast ?? '—'}`);
+            lines.push(`- **Location:** ${f.location}`);
+            lines.push(`- **Fix:** ${f.suggestion}`);
+            if (f.cssSelector && f.cssFix) {
+                lines.push(`- **CSS:** \`${f.cssSelector} { ${f.cssFix} }\``);
+            }
+            lines.push('');
+        }
+        lines.push('---');
+        lines.push('');
+    }
     // Per-page results
     for (const result of results) {
         lines.push(`## ${result.url}`);
@@ -326,9 +149,11 @@ function generateReport(results, profile) {
             lines.push('**Design System Breakdown:**');
             lines.push('');
             const ds = result.designSystemScore;
-            const dsKeys = ['layout', 'typography', 'color', 'spacing', 'components', 'interactions', 'accessibility', 'polish'];
-            for (const key of dsKeys) {
-                if (ds[key] !== undefined) {
+            // Universal dimensions in fixed order, then any custom dimensions (alpha)
+            const universal = ['layout', 'typography', 'color', 'spacing', 'components', 'interactions', 'accessibility', 'polish'];
+            const custom = Object.keys(ds).filter(k => !universal.includes(k)).sort();
+            for (const key of [...universal, ...custom]) {
+                if (typeof ds[key] === 'number') {
                     const bar = '█'.repeat(Math.round(ds[key])) + '░'.repeat(10 - Math.round(ds[key]));
                     lines.push(`- ${key}: \`${bar}\` ${ds[key]}/10`);
                 }
@@ -362,11 +187,9 @@ export async function runDesignAudit(opts) {
         await runTokenExtraction(opts);
         return;
     }
-    const profile = opts.profile ?? 'general';
-    if (!PROFILE_RUBRICS[profile]) {
-        cliError(`unknown profile: ${profile}. Options: ${Object.keys(PROFILE_RUBRICS).join(', ')}`);
-        process.exit(1);
-    }
+    // Profile is optional — auto-classified by default. Override with --profile
+    // selects a single type fragment instead of letting the classifier decide.
+    const profile = opts.profile;
     const maxPages = opts.pages ?? 5;
     const provider = (opts.provider ?? 'claude-code');
     const modelName = resolveProviderModelName(provider, opts.model);
@@ -374,7 +197,8 @@ export async function runDesignAudit(opts) {
     const [vw, vh] = (opts.viewport ?? '1440x900').split('x').map(Number);
     console.log('');
     console.log(`  ${chalk.bold('bad design-audit')}`);
-    console.log(`  ${profile} ${chalk.dim('·')} ${chalk.cyan(modelName)} ${chalk.dim('·')} ${vw}×${vh} ${chalk.dim('·')} up to ${maxPages} pages`);
+    const profileLabel = profile ?? chalk.dim('auto-classify');
+    console.log(`  ${profileLabel} ${chalk.dim('·')} ${chalk.cyan(modelName)} ${chalk.dim('·')} ${vw}×${vh} ${chalk.dim('·')} up to ${maxPages} pages`);
     console.log(`  ${chalk.dim('→')} ${opts.url}`);
     console.log('');
     const browser = await chromium.launch({ headless: opts.headless ?? true });
@@ -402,20 +226,41 @@ export async function runDesignAudit(opts) {
         llmTimeoutMs: 120_000, // design audits generate ~8k tokens of structured JSON — need 2min
     });
     const driver = new PlaywrightDriver(page);
-    // Audit each page
+    // Audit each page through the classify → measure → evaluate pipeline
     const results = [];
     for (let i = 0; i < pages.length; i++) {
         const url = pages[i];
         console.log(`  ${chalk.dim(`[${i + 1}/${pages.length}]`)} ${url}`);
-        const result = await auditSinglePage(brain, driver, page, url, profile, screenshotDir);
+        const gen2 = await auditOnePage({
+            brain,
+            driver,
+            page,
+            url,
+            profileOverride: profile,
+            screenshotDir,
+            userRubricsDir: opts.rubricsDir,
+        });
+        const result = gen2;
         results.push(result);
         const icon = result.score >= 8 ? chalk.green('✓') : result.score >= 5 ? chalk.yellow('~') : chalk.red('✗');
         const scoreColor = result.score >= 8 ? chalk.green : result.score >= 5 ? chalk.yellow : chalk.red;
         const findingCount = result.findings.length;
-        console.log(`  ${icon} ${scoreColor(`${result.score}/10`)} ${chalk.dim('—')} ${findingCount} finding${findingCount !== 1 ? 's' : ''}`);
+        const classLabel = result.classification
+            ? chalk.dim(` (${result.classification.type}/${result.classification.domain})`)
+            : '';
+        console.log(`  ${icon} ${scoreColor(`${result.score}/10`)} ${chalk.dim('—')} ${findingCount} finding${findingCount !== 1 ? 's' : ''}${classLabel}`);
+    }
+    // Cross-page systemic detection + top-fixes ranking.
+    // Findings appearing on 2+ pages collapse into a single systemic finding.
+    // The deduped set drives the Top Fixes section at the top of the report.
+    let topFixes = [];
+    if (results.length > 0) {
+        const perPage = results.map(r => r.findings);
+        const deduped = detectSystemicFindings(perPage);
+        topFixes = topByRoi(deduped, 5);
     }
     // Generate report
-    const report = generateReport(results, profile);
+    const report = generateReport(results, profile, topFixes);
     const reportPath = path.join(outputDir, 'report.md');
     fs.writeFileSync(reportPath, report);
     const allFindings = results.flatMap(r => r.findings);
@@ -430,6 +275,7 @@ export async function runDesignAudit(opts) {
             profile,
             url: opts.url,
             pages: results,
+            topFixes,
             summary: { avgScore, totalFindings: allFindings.length, critical, major, minor },
         }, null, 2));
         console.log(`  ${chalk.dim('JSON →')} ${jsonPath}`);
@@ -457,8 +303,15 @@ export async function runDesignAudit(opts) {
         for (let rep = 0; rep < 2; rep++) {
             const repResults = [];
             for (const url of pages) {
-                const r = await auditSinglePage(brain, driver, page, url, profile);
-                repResults.push(r);
+                const gen2 = await auditOnePage({
+                    brain,
+                    driver,
+                    page,
+                    url,
+                    profileOverride: profile,
+                    userRubricsDir: opts.rubricsDir,
+                });
+                repResults.push(gen2);
             }
             const repAvg = repResults.reduce((s, r) => s + r.score, 0) / repResults.length;
             scores.push(repAvg);
@@ -482,14 +335,19 @@ export async function runDesignAudit(opts) {
         // --evolve=claude-code|codex|opencode|<custom> → agent dispatch
         const evolveMode = opts.evolve === true || opts.evolve === 'true' || opts.evolve === 'css' ? 'css' : opts.evolve;
         let evolveResult;
+        // Evolve loops still use the legacy single-profile re-audit. When Gen 2 auto-classified,
+        // synthesize a profile name from the first page's classification (or fall back to 'general').
+        const evolveProfile = profile
+            ?? results[0]?.classification?.type
+            ?? 'general';
         if (evolveMode !== 'css') {
             // Agent-dispatched evolve — a coding agent edits the actual source code
             const projectDir = opts.projectDir ?? process.cwd();
-            evolveResult = await runAgentEvolveLoop(brain, driver, page, pages, profile, results, outputDir, opts.evolveRounds ?? 3, evolveMode, projectDir, opts.debug);
+            evolveResult = await runAgentEvolveLoop(brain, driver, page, pages, evolveProfile, results, outputDir, opts.evolveRounds ?? 3, evolveMode, projectDir, opts.debug);
         }
         else {
             // CSS-injection evolve — ephemeral fixes injected into the browser page
-            evolveResult = await runEvolveLoop(brain, driver, page, pages, profile, results, outputDir, opts.evolveRounds ?? 3);
+            evolveResult = await runEvolveLoop(brain, driver, page, pages, evolveProfile, results, outputDir, opts.evolveRounds ?? 3);
         }
         // Write evolve report
         const evolvePath = path.join(outputDir, 'evolve-report.md');
@@ -598,7 +456,14 @@ async function runEvolveLoop(brain, driver, page, pages, profile, initialResults
                 // Take screenshot of fixed state
                 const screenshotDir = path.join(outputDir, `screenshots-round-${round}`);
                 fs.mkdirSync(screenshotDir, { recursive: true });
-                const result = await auditSinglePage(brain, driver, page, url, profile, screenshotDir);
+                const result = (await auditOnePage({
+                    brain,
+                    driver,
+                    page,
+                    url,
+                    profileOverride: profile,
+                    screenshotDir,
+                }));
                 roundResults.push(result);
             }
             catch {
@@ -847,7 +712,14 @@ async function runAgentEvolveLoop(brain, driver, page, pages, profile, initialRe
         const roundScreenshotDir = path.join(outputDir, `screenshots-round-${round}`);
         fs.mkdirSync(roundScreenshotDir, { recursive: true });
         for (const url of pages) {
-            const result = await auditSinglePage(brain, driver, page, url, profile, roundScreenshotDir);
+            const result = (await auditOnePage({
+                brain,
+                driver,
+                page,
+                url,
+                profileOverride: profile,
+                screenshotDir: roundScreenshotDir,
+            }));
             roundResults.push(result);
         }
         const roundAvg = roundResults.reduce((s, r) => s + r.score, 0) / roundResults.length;
@@ -892,70 +764,6 @@ async function runAgentEvolveLoop(brain, driver, page, pages, profile, initialRe
         cssOverride: '', // no CSS override in agent mode — agent edited source directly
     };
 }
-// Direct page audit using brain.generate with custom prompt
-async function auditSinglePage(brain, driver, page, url, profile, screenshotDir) {
-    try {
-        await page.goto(url, { waitUntil: 'networkidle', timeout: 20_000 }).catch(() => page.goto(url, { waitUntil: 'domcontentloaded', timeout: 15_000 }));
-        await page.waitForTimeout(2000);
-        // Dismiss cookie banners
-        for (const sel of ['button:has-text("Accept all")', 'button:has-text("Accept")', 'button:has-text("Reject all")', 'button:has-text("Got it")', 'button:has-text("Close")']) {
-            const btn = page.locator(sel).first();
-            if (await btn.isVisible({ timeout: 500 }).catch(() => false)) {
-                await btn.click({ timeout: 2000 }).catch(() => null);
-                await page.waitForTimeout(500);
-                break;
-            }
-        }
-        const state = await driver.observe();
-        // Save screenshot
-        let screenshotPath;
-        if (screenshotDir) {
-            const slug = new URL(url).pathname.replace(/\//g, '_').replace(/^_/, '') || 'index';
-            screenshotPath = path.join(screenshotDir, `${slug}.png`);
-            await page.screenshot({ path: screenshotPath, fullPage: false });
-        }
-        const result = await brain.auditDesign(state, `Audit the design quality of this page: ${url}`, [], buildAuditPrompt(profile));
-        let summary = '';
-        let strengths = [];
-        let designSystemScore;
-        try {
-            let text = result.raw.trim();
-            if (text.startsWith('```'))
-                text = text.replace(/^```(?:json)?\n?/, '').replace(/\n?```$/, '');
-            const parsed = JSON.parse(text);
-            summary = parsed.summary || '';
-            strengths = Array.isArray(parsed.strengths) ? parsed.strengths : [];
-            if (parsed.designSystemScore && typeof parsed.designSystemScore === 'object') {
-                designSystemScore = {};
-                for (const [k, v] of Object.entries(parsed.designSystemScore)) {
-                    if (typeof v === 'number')
-                        designSystemScore[k] = v;
-                }
-            }
-        }
-        catch { /* use defaults */ }
-        return {
-            url,
-            score: result.score,
-            summary,
-            strengths,
-            findings: result.findings,
-            screenshotPath,
-            tokensUsed: result.tokensUsed,
-            designSystemScore,
-        };
-    }
-    catch (err) {
-        return {
-            url,
-            score: 0,
-            summary: 'Failed to audit',
-            strengths: [],
-            findings: [],
-            error: err instanceof Error ? err.message : String(err),
-        };
-    }
-}
 // ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 // Design Token Extraction — pure DOM, no LLM calls
 // ---------------------------------------------------------------------------