Prompt file imported from zademy/graph-example (
.codex/prompts/reframe.md). Fill in{{arguments}}before use. Copyright stays with the author.
description: OpenWolf's design brain — pick/migrate UI frameworks or audit/fix UI against the anti-generic design principles argument-hint: [migrate [framework] | audit [target] | fix [target]]
Arguments: {{arguments}}
Read .wolf/reframe-frameworks.md first — it contains the Design Principles
(anti-generic mandate), the framework knowledge base, and the migration prompts.
Use .wolf/anatomy.md to locate UI files instead of scanning.
Pick the mode from the arguments (default: migrate if a framework is named or the
user is choosing one; otherwise ask which mode they want):
Mode: migrate [framework]
Framework selection and migration.
- If no framework is named, ask the Decision Questions from the knowledge file (stop early once the answer narrows to 1–2 options) and recommend one.
- Use that framework's prompt from the knowledge file, adapted to this project's
real structure via
.wolf/anatomy.md. - The Design Principles override anything generic in the prompt: no template hero→features→CTA structures, no stock palettes — distinctive by default.
Mode: audit [target]
Walk the target (default: the whole UI) and flag every match against the AI-tell blocklist in the Design Principles: purple gradient heroes, glassmorphism-everything, emoji headings, generic 3-column feature grids, stock Tailwind palette, Inter for every role, template SaaS structure, filler microcopy. Produce a findings table — component, tell matched, severity, specific replacement direction — and end with the 3 changes that would most increase distinctiveness.
Mode: fix [target]
Run the audit, then fix findings in severity order. Fixes must move toward, not merely away: typography chosen with intent, a palette derived from the product's actual brand/domain, asymmetry where it serves hierarchy, copy specific to what the product does, density appropriate to the audience. Preserve the existing framework and component APIs — this is a design pass, not a rewrite. After each fix, state what changed and why it reads as designed-on-purpose.
Acceptance criterion for every mode: if the result could be swapped onto any other product without anyone noticing, it fails.
