Ss Score

Design Score

/ss-review tells you *what's wrong*. /ss-score tells you *how good it is

overall* and *what to fix first* — a single number plus a category breakdown, so

you can track UI quality like you track test coverage.

When NOT to use

• For a quick pass/fail before committing → use /ss-lint
• For a full prose audit with fixes → use /ss-review
• For logic/config with no visual artifact — scoring is meaningless

Step 0 — Resolve the effective rule set

Before scoring, read .styleseed/effective-rules.md and .styleseed/manifest.json. If they are

missing or ss-resolve --check reports drift, invoke /ss-resolve or $ss-resolve from the

project lock first. Only fall back to the source handbook when no project lock exists.

Score in authority order: core invariants first, then the exact output grammar, domain/page,

brand recipe, optional aesthetic profile, and bounded lock values. The lock cannot waive an invariant.

Unknown values are a resolver error; do not invent an exception.

The output must name the effective rule set, for example:

Rule set: operations-console × SaaS × dashboard × enterprise-workbench × swiss

What to score

Score the file (or each file in a directory) on eight weighted categories that

map to the design language. Total = 100.

| Category | Weight | Reads from |

|---|---|---|

| Color discipline | 16 | DESIGN-LANGUAGE §1, §18, §72 + VISUAL-CRAFT §C4 |

| Hierarchy & typography | 16 | §2, §3, §4, §16 + Font Size table + VISUAL-CRAFT §C2 |

| Layout & rhythm | 12 | §13, §14, §15, §61 + VISUAL-CRAFT §C1 |

| Cards & elevation | 10 | §7, §8, §12, §1 + VISUAL-CRAFT §C3 |

| States & a11y | 18 | §11, §70, §71, §72 + VISUAL-CRAFT §C3 |

| Motion & interaction | 6 | §24, §59 + engine/motion |

| Coherence | 12 | VISUAL-CRAFT §C0 (one choice per axis) |

| Distinctiveness | 10 | Golden Rules 14–16 + VISUAL-CRAFT §CC-9b (not generic/default/template) |

How to score each category

For each category, start at full marks and subtract for violations you find by

reading the code. Be specific and evidence-based — cite the line.

Color discipline (16) — deduct for: accidental #000/text-black outside a profile or

grammar contract that explicitly uses hard black structurally (−4 each, cap −8); competing

decorative emphasis hues (−5); emoji used as UI icons (−5); a normal/OK/"보통" state shown in a status color instead of

neutral grey (−4); status color on most/every row (no severity hierarchy) (−4);

decorative hues (gold stars, rainbow category dots) instead of accent/grey (−3);

hardcoded hex where a semantic token exists (−2 each, cap −6); status conveyed by color

alone (−4); the unlocked default indigo (#5E6AD2/#4F46E5) used as the accent instead of

a chosen domain-fit color (−4).

Distinctiveness (10) — a coherent screen can still read "AI-generated." Deduct for: the

icon-chip cliché — a generic Lucide line-icon in an identical pale-tinted rounded-square,

repeated for every feature/step (−4, §CC-9b); the StyleSeed demo layout copied verbatim

(hero+chat / 3-step / feature-grid / pricing) with no product-specific identity (−4); **no focal

point** — an all-even grid of same-weight, centered, evenly-spaced cards (−3); the hero shows a

stock/placeholder visual instead of *this* product (−3); the escape hatch as a new uniform

(§CC-9c) — ghost 01/02/03 index numbers on every section, or identical uppercase-overline +

big-number cards repeated with no variation (−2); distinctive-but-dated (§CC-9d) — full

beige/paper page base, serif body text on a product surface, dark-heavy blocks that read

"brochure" not "2026 product" (−3). Cap −10.

Hierarchy & typography (16) — deduct for: number/unit not ~2:1 (−4); font

sizes off the Font Size table / text-[var(--…)] for size (−5); everything the

same weight, no clear primary (−5); cramped or wrong line-height on body (−3);

body < 16px on a desktop/web B2B surface (tight mobile scale on a wide screen) (−4 —

but dense-data chrome is exempt: chart ticks, mono SHAs/timestamps, table metadata at

12–13px are correct; and dashboard app-chrome h1 at 22–24px is correct, not a violation

of the marketing 40–56px headline scale).

Layout & rhythm (12) — deduct for: grouping that contradicts the selected grammar or recipe (−6):

operations-console needs explicit functional groups, while editorial-reading should not be

forced into cards; enterprise-workbench needs aligned panels/rows while public-service

needs flat step flow; arbitrary off-scale spacing (−3); same section type repeated without purpose

(−4); no discernible proximity rhythm (−3).

Cards & elevation (10) — deduct for mixed or task-inappropriate surface language. Hairlines,

flat grouping, tonal ramps, or restrained shadows are valid only when the selected grammar/profile

uses them coherently. Deduct mixed border/shadow languages (−4), visibly heavy or directionally

inconsistent shadows (−4), or missing group/surface separation where the grammar requires it (−5).

States & a11y (18) — deduct for: missing empty/loading/error state on a data

surface (−5 each, cap −10 — a static mockup or marketing landing with NO data surface is

N/A: skip these deductions, don't fail the category); contrast below 4.5:1 body / 3:1

large (−6); touch target < 44px on a touch surface (pointer-first desktop controls at

36–40px are fine) (−4); no visible focus / outline:none (−5); icon-only control

without aria-label (−3).

Motion & interaction (6) — deduct for: random/ad-hoc fades instead of a named

seed/keyword (−3); motion that delays content or blocks an action (−4); no

prefers-reduced-motion handling on custom motion (−3). **Scroll-linked/parallax/3D/animated-

gradient is SURFACE-DEPENDENT (§43):** on an app/dashboard/data/form surface it's forbidden

(−5); on a marketing/landing/brand page it's ALLOWED (the Cinematic tier) — there, do NOT

deduct for scroll-linked reveals, pinned sections, 3D hero, or animated backgrounds; only deduct

for scroll-JACKING (hijacking scroll / trapping) (−5), motion that hides content until scroll

or delays the headline/CTA (−4), or a missing prefers-reduced-motion fallback (−3). Judge by

page type first, then score.

Coherence (12) — the "one choice per axis" laws (VISUAL-CRAFT §C0). Deduct for

each axis that is *mixed* rather than unified across the file: mixed radius

personalities, e.g. sharp panel + pill buttons (−5); two+ competing accent hues used

for emphasis (−4); mixed shadow languages / light directions (−3); mixed icon

families, fill modes, or stroke weights (−3); same radius on a nested element instead

of inner = outer − padding (−2); inconsistent control heights for buttons/inputs

(−2). This is the category that most predicts "looks AI-generated" — weight evidence

of system-wide consistency, not per-component prettiness.

Clamp each category at 0. Sum to a total.

Output format

## Design Score: 70 / 100   (src/app/Dashboard.tsx)
Rule set: operations-console × product-ui × SaaS × dashboard × enterprise-workbench × swiss

████████████████░░░░░░  C-

Color discipline      11/16   ▓▓▓░  competing orange+blue emphasis hues (l.28-34)
Hierarchy & typography 13/16  ▓▓▓▓  number/unit 1:1 on hero (l.18)
Layout & rhythm         9/12  ▓▓▓░  two identical KPI rows (l.22-31)
Cards & elevation       8/10  ▓▓░░  mixed border + floating-shadow language (l.22)
States & a11y          11/18  ▓▓░░  no empty/loading state; focus ring missing (l.55)
Motion & interaction    4/6   ▓▓▓░  default fade, not a named seed
Coherence               6/12  ▓▓░░  sharp cards (l.22) + pill buttons (l.48); 3 accent hues (§C0)
Distinctiveness          8/10  ▓▓▓░  all-even KPI grid weakens the operational focal panel

### Fix first (highest score gain)
1. Add empty + loading states to the orders list       → +7 states (§71)
2. Unify radius (pick soft 8-12px) + collapse to one accent → +9 coherence+color (§C0, §2)
3. Drop the 1px borders, use tone + ≤8% shadow         → +4 cards  (§7)

Re-score after: ~92 / 100.

Use letter bands: 90+ A · 80-89 B · 70-79 C · 60-69 D · <60 F.

Gate mode (use this as the Quality Gate before showing the user UI)

The Quality Gate (CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md) is /ss-score run as a loop, not a one-off:

• Score the just-generated UI.
• If < 80, apply the "fix first" list (use /ss-review to make the edits), then re-score.
• Repeat up to ~3×, or until ≥ 80.
• Present the UI with the final score and a one-line "fixed: …".

The pass bar is a floor, not a ceiling — get to ≥ 80 and stop; don't chase 100. The point

is that no first-draft, obviously-incoherent UI reaches the user. Especially never ship below

80 with a rainbow status list, emoji icons, two accents, or missing states — those are the

exact tells the gate exists to catch.

Rules

• Read the file — score from real evidence (line numbers), never guess.
• Order the "fix first" list by score gain, not by severity alone — the goal

is the fastest path to a better number.

• For a directory, print a one-line score per file, then the lowest-scoring file's

full breakdown.

• Don't auto-edit in plain scoring. /ss-score measures; /ss-review and /ss-motion fix.

In Gate mode (above) you do fix-and-re-score until the floor is met.

• As a *gate*, ≥ 80 is a floor before showing the user — but don't over-polish: chasing 95→100

to delay shipping is worse than shipping a clean 85.