Huashu design en
Huashu's Content Creation Skills Collection — 21 Practical Skills translated to English using Claude.
npx -y skills add Biraj2004/huashu-skills-english --skill huashu-design-enAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 3 stars3 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Design philosophy consultant — recommends 3 directions from 20 styles, generates visual demos, and AI prompts. Use when the user mentions "design style", "design direction", "colour palette", "visual style", "design review", or "recommend a style".
SKILL.md
73.2 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Design Philosophy Consultant
Understand requirements like a top design agency — recommend design philosophy directions, generate AI prompts, and conduct expert-level reviews.
Core Principles
- Constrain philosophy, not form — Define "why design this way", not "what it looks like"
- Deep understanding first — Understand what the user truly wants to communicate before recommending a style
- Design is probabilistic — Good constraints produce diverse, high-quality results
- Review like a perfectionist — High standards, but always provide an actionable path forward
When This Skill Triggers
Before design (Design Direction) — Any output that involves visual presentation:
- Websites / landing pages / brand sites, app interfaces / prototypes
- PPT / Keynote, PDF reports / white papers
- Infographics / posters / illustrations / covers
After design (Design Critique) — Automatically initiates a review once a visual design output is complete.
Workflow: Before Design (Phases 1–6)
Phase 1: Deep Understanding of Requirements
- Questions: Target audience / Core message / Emotional tone / Output format
- Maximum 3 questions at once; skip if requirements are already clear
Phase 2: Consultative Restatement (100–200 words)
- Restate the core requirements, audience, scenario, and emotional tone in your own words
- Close with: "Based on this understanding, I've prepared 3 design directions for you"
Phase 3: Recommend 3 Design Philosophies
Each direction includes:
| Element | Explanation |
param($m)
$inner = $m.Groups[1].Value
# Split by | and fix each cell separator
$cells = $inner -split '\|'
$fixedCells = $cells | ForEach-Object {
$cell = ---
name: huashu-design description: Design philosophy consultant — recommends 3 directions from 20 styles, generates visual demos, and AI prompts. Use when the user mentions "design style", "design direction", "colour palette", "visual style", "design review", or "recommend a style".
Design Philosophy Consultant
Understand requirements like a top design agency — recommend design philosophy directions, generate AI prompts, and conduct expert-level reviews.
Core Principles
- Constrain philosophy, not form — Define "why design this way", not "what it looks like"
- Deep understanding first — Understand what the user truly wants to communicate before recommending a style
- Design is probabilistic — Good constraints produce diverse, high-quality results
- Review like a perfectionist — High standards, but always provide an actionable path forward
When This Skill Triggers
Before design (Design Direction) — Any output that involves visual presentation:
- Websites / landing pages / brand sites, app interfaces / prototypes
- PPT / Keynote, PDF reports / white papers
- Infographics / posters / illustrations / covers
After design (Design Critique) — Automatically initiates a review once a visual design output is complete.
Workflow: Before Design (Phases 1–6)
Phase 1: Deep Understanding of Requirements
- Questions: Target audience / Core message / Emotional tone / Output format
- Maximum 3 questions at once; skip if requirements are already clear
Phase 2: Consultative Restatement (100–200 words)
- Restate the core requirements, audience, scenario, and emotional tone in your own words
- Close with: "Based on this understanding, I've prepared 3 design directions for you"
Phase 3: Recommend 3 Design Philosophies
Each direction includes:
| Element | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Style name | Must include designer/agency name (e.g., "Kenya Hara-style Eastern Minimalism" — not just "minimalism") |
| Why it's a good fit | 50–100 words connecting the user's requirements to this designer's philosophy |
| Defining characteristics | 3–4 hallmark visual elements |
| Mood keywords | 3–5 keywords |
| Representative references | Optional — helps the user search and understand |
Differentiation strategy (mandatory):
The 3 directions must come from 3 different schools, creating obvious visual contrast:
| School | Visual Mood | Best used as |
|---|---|---|
| Information Architecture (01–04) | Rational, data-driven, restrained | Safe / professional choice |
| Kinetic Poetry (05–08) | Dynamic, immersive, technology-aesthetic | Bold / avant-garde choice |
| Minimalism (09–12) | Ordered, spacious, refined | Safe / premium choice |
| Experimental Vanguard (13–16) | Pioneering, generative art, visual impact | Bold / innovative choice |
| Eastern Philosophy (17–20) | Warm, poetic, contemplative | Distinctive / unique choice |
Recommended combinations:
- "Pentagram editorial (Information Architecture) + Sagmeister experimental typography (Minimalism) + Kenya Hara Eastern whitespace (Eastern Philosophy)"
- "Fathom data storytelling (Information Architecture) + Field.io particle generation (Kinetic Poetry) + Takram speculative design (Eastern Philosophy)"
❌ Never recommend 2+ styles from the same school — insufficient differentiation; user can't tell the difference
Phase 3.5: Generate 3 Visual Demos in Parallel
Core belief: Seeing is more powerful than describing. Don't make the user imagine a design style from text — show it directly.
After recommending the 3 directions, immediately and proactively launch Agent Teams to generate 3 visual demos in parallel:
Inform the user: "I've launched 3 parallel agents who are generating visual samples for all 3 directions.
In a moment you'll see the actual results — much more intuitive than a text description.
After viewing them, you can: choose one direction to develop further / mix elements from multiple directions / provide feedback for adjustment."
Generation process:
- Use Agent Teams to launch 3 background agents (
run_in_background: true) - Each agent generates a single-page HTML demo based on the style's prompt DNA + user's actual content
- Take a Playwright screenshot (
npx playwright screenshot file:///path.html output.png --viewport-size=1200,900) - Once all 3 agents are done, present all 3 screenshots together
Demo content rules:
- Use the user's real content/theme (not Lorem ipsum placeholders)
- The demo reflects the actual output format the user requested (if they want a PPT, make it slide-style; if they want a cover, make it cover-style)
- HTML files saved to
_temp/design-demos/, named:demo-[style-name].html
Execution path selection:
| Style's "best path" | Demo generation method |
|---|---|
| HTML | Generate full HTML → Playwright screenshot |
| AI-generated | Use nano-banana-pro to generate image (style DNA + content description) |
| Hybrid | Generate HTML layout + AI-generated illustration |
Phase 4: User Selection & Iteration
After viewing the 3 visual demos:
- Choose a direction: "I like Direction A" → Proceed to Phase 5 for refinement
- Mix elements: "A's colour palette + C's layout" → Generate a hybrid demo
- Tweak: "Direction B is good but the text is too small" → Adjust and re-screenshot
- Start over: "Not happy with any of them" → Return to Phase 3 for new recommendations
Phase 5: Generate AI Prompts
- Structure:
[Design philosophy constraints] + [Content description] + [Technical parameters] - ✅ Use specific characteristics, not style names
- ✅ Include colour codes (#HEX values), proportions, spatial allocation, output specifications
- ❌ Avoid Huashu's forbidden territory: cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117)
- Reference
references/design-styles.mdfor prompt templates
Phase 6: Support Iterative Refinement
- Variant suggestions / platform optimisation / hybrid experiments
Workflow: After Design (Phase 7)
Auto-trigger: When a design output is completed
Review dimensions (0–10 points):
- Philosophical consistency — Is it faithful to the chosen design philosophy?
- Visual hierarchy — Is the importance of information clearly communicated?
- Detail execution — Are alignment, spacing, fonts, and colours precise?
- Functionality — Does the design serve the objective? Is there excessive decoration?
- Innovation — Is there something distinctive? Has the design avoided clichés?
Output format:
## Design Review Report
**Overall Score**: X.X/10 [Excellent / Good / Needs Improvement / Unsatisfactory]
**Dimension Scores**: [5 dimensions, each X/10]
### Strengths (Keep)
[Specific call-outs on what works well]
### Issues (Fix)
[Severity: ⚠️ Critical / ⚡ Important / 💡 Enhancement]
- Current state → Why it's a problem → Fix recommendation (with specific values)
### Quick Wins
If you only have 5 minutes, prioritise these 3 things
Review tone: Direct, no hedging / Explain why + how to fix / 7 = Good, 8+ = Excellent / Critique the design, not the designer
Detailed scoring criteria and common issues → see references/critique-guide.md
References Library
| File | Contents | When to read |
|---|---|---|
references/design-styles.md | Detailed library of 20 design philosophies (5 schools), including AI prompt templates | When you need more style options or deeper understanding of a style |
references/scene-templates.md | Scene templates organised by output type (cover / PPT / PDF / infographic, etc.) | When you need specific dimensions and recommended styles for a particular scenario |
references/critique-guide.md | In-depth review guide: detailed scoring criteria, scenario-specific review focus, common issues checklist | When you need a more precise review basis |
User Preferences
- ❌ Cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117) = aesthetic no-go zone
- ✅ Illustrations: AI-generated first; HTML screenshots only for precise data tables
- ✅ Cover images should not include personal signatures or watermarks
- ✅ Use "curly quotes" in copy (not straight quotes)
Web / App Design — Icons & Images Rules
Absolutely prohibited:
- ❌ No default emoji as icons
- ❌ No blank placeholder areas ("image goes here" grey boxes)
Icon approach (in priority order):
- Reference open-source icon libraries — Choose the one best matching the design style: Lucide (minimalist) / Phosphor (warm) / Heroicons (Apple-style) / Tabler (general)
- Hand-craft SVG icons — When no open-source icon suits, design inline SVG icons, ensuring line weight / corner radius matches the design system
Image approach (in priority order):
- Find the most suitable real image — Search and reference an external link, or download locally and reference the local path
- Reference open-source images — Direct links from free libraries like Unsplash / Pexels
- AI-generated images — Call
nano-banana-proto generate an image matching the current design style, then reference locally after downloading
In short: Delivered design must be complete — no unfilled gaps.
Notes
- Always include the designer/agency name — Say "Pentagram's grid system" not just "grid system"
- When recommending, always explain "why this designer is a good fit", not just "what this style is"
- When reviewing, directly call out the problem + provide the solution (with specific values)
- Encourage the user to experiment and iterate — design is inherently probabilistic
By Huashu | AI Native Coder · Independent Developer WeChat Official Account "Huashu" | 300k+ followers | AI Tools & Productivity Flagship products: Kitty Catchlight (AppStore Paid Rankings Top 1) · Play DeepSeek with One Book .Trim() if ($cell -match '^:?-+:? | Style name | Must include designer/agency name (e.g., "Kenya Hara-style Eastern Minimalism" — not just "minimalism") | | Why it's a good fit | 50–100 words connecting the user's requirements to this designer's philosophy | | Defining characteristics | 3–4 hallmark visual elements | | Mood keywords | 3–5 keywords | | Representative references | Optional — helps the user search and understand |
Differentiation strategy (mandatory):
The 3 directions must come from 3 different schools, creating obvious visual contrast:
| School | Visual Mood | Best used as |
|---|---|---|
| Information Architecture (01–04) | Rational, data-driven, restrained | Safe / professional choice |
| Kinetic Poetry (05–08) | Dynamic, immersive, technology-aesthetic | Bold / avant-garde choice |
| Minimalism (09–12) | Ordered, spacious, refined | Safe / premium choice |
| Experimental Vanguard (13–16) | Pioneering, generative art, visual impact | Bold / innovative choice |
| Eastern Philosophy (17–20) | Warm, poetic, contemplative | Distinctive / unique choice |
Recommended combinations:
- "Pentagram editorial (Information Architecture) + Sagmeister experimental typography (Minimalism) + Kenya Hara Eastern whitespace (Eastern Philosophy)"
- "Fathom data storytelling (Information Architecture) + Field.io particle generation (Kinetic Poetry) + Takram speculative design (Eastern Philosophy)"
❌ Never recommend 2+ styles from the same school — insufficient differentiation; user can't tell the difference
Phase 3.5: Generate 3 Visual Demos in Parallel
Core belief: Seeing is more powerful than describing. Don't make the user imagine a design style from text — show it directly.
After recommending the 3 directions, immediately and proactively launch Agent Teams to generate 3 visual demos in parallel:
Inform the user: "I've launched 3 parallel agents who are generating visual samples for all 3 directions.
In a moment you'll see the actual results — much more intuitive than a text description.
After viewing them, you can: choose one direction to develop further / mix elements from multiple directions / provide feedback for adjustment."
Generation process:
- Use Agent Teams to launch 3 background agents (
run_in_background: true) - Each agent generates a single-page HTML demo based on the style's prompt DNA + user's actual content
- Take a Playwright screenshot (
npx playwright screenshot file:///path.html output.png --viewport-size=1200,900) - Once all 3 agents are done, present all 3 screenshots together
Demo content rules:
- Use the user's real content/theme (not Lorem ipsum placeholders)
- The demo reflects the actual output format the user requested (if they want a PPT, make it slide-style; if they want a cover, make it cover-style)
- HTML files saved to
_temp/design-demos/, named:demo-[style-name].html
Execution path selection:
| Style's "best path" | Demo generation method |
|---|---|
| HTML | Generate full HTML → Playwright screenshot |
| AI-generated | Use nano-banana-pro to generate image (style DNA + content description) |
| Hybrid | Generate HTML layout + AI-generated illustration |
Phase 4: User Selection & Iteration
After viewing the 3 visual demos:
- Choose a direction: "I like Direction A" → Proceed to Phase 5 for refinement
- Mix elements: "A's colour palette + C's layout" → Generate a hybrid demo
- Tweak: "Direction B is good but the text is too small" → Adjust and re-screenshot
- Start over: "Not happy with any of them" → Return to Phase 3 for new recommendations
Phase 5: Generate AI Prompts
- Structure:
[Design philosophy constraints] + [Content description] + [Technical parameters] - ✅ Use specific characteristics, not style names
- ✅ Include colour codes (#HEX values), proportions, spatial allocation, output specifications
- ❌ Avoid Huashu's forbidden territory: cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117)
- Reference
references/design-styles.mdfor prompt templates
Phase 6: Support Iterative Refinement
- Variant suggestions / platform optimisation / hybrid experiments
Workflow: After Design (Phase 7)
Auto-trigger: When a design output is completed
Review dimensions (0–10 points):
- Philosophical consistency — Is it faithful to the chosen design philosophy?
- Visual hierarchy — Is the importance of information clearly communicated?
- Detail execution — Are alignment, spacing, fonts, and colours precise?
- Functionality — Does the design serve the objective? Is there excessive decoration?
- Innovation — Is there something distinctive? Has the design avoided clichés?
Output format:
## Design Review Report
**Overall Score**: X.X/10 [Excellent / Good / Needs Improvement / Unsatisfactory]
**Dimension Scores**: [5 dimensions, each X/10]
### Strengths (Keep)
[Specific call-outs on what works well]
### Issues (Fix)
[Severity: ⚠️ Critical / ⚡ Important / 💡 Enhancement]
- Current state → Why it's a problem → Fix recommendation (with specific values)
### Quick Wins
If you only have 5 minutes, prioritise these 3 things
Review tone: Direct, no hedging / Explain why + how to fix / 7 = Good, 8+ = Excellent / Critique the design, not the designer
Detailed scoring criteria and common issues → see references/critique-guide.md
References Library
| File | Contents | When to read |
|---|---|---|
references/design-styles.md | Detailed library of 20 design philosophies (5 schools), including AI prompt templates | When you need more style options or deeper understanding of a style |
references/scene-templates.md | Scene templates organised by output type (cover / PPT / PDF / infographic, etc.) | When you need specific dimensions and recommended styles for a particular scenario |
references/critique-guide.md | In-depth review guide: detailed scoring criteria, scenario-specific review focus, common issues checklist | When you need a more precise review basis |
User Preferences
- ❌ Cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117) = aesthetic no-go zone
- ✅ Illustrations: AI-generated first; HTML screenshots only for precise data tables
- ✅ Cover images should not include personal signatures or watermarks
- ✅ Use "curly quotes" in copy (not straight quotes)
Web / App Design — Icons & Images Rules
Absolutely prohibited:
- ❌ No default emoji as icons
- ❌ No blank placeholder areas ("image goes here" grey boxes)
Icon approach (in priority order):
- Reference open-source icon libraries — Choose the one best matching the design style: Lucide (minimalist) / Phosphor (warm) / Heroicons (Apple-style) / Tabler (general)
- Hand-craft SVG icons — When no open-source icon suits, design inline SVG icons, ensuring line weight / corner radius matches the design system
Image approach (in priority order):
- Find the most suitable real image — Search and reference an external link, or download locally and reference the local path
- Reference open-source images — Direct links from free libraries like Unsplash / Pexels
- AI-generated images — Call
nano-banana-proto generate an image matching the current design style, then reference locally after downloading
In short: Delivered design must be complete — no unfilled gaps.
Notes
- Always include the designer/agency name — Say "Pentagram's grid system" not just "grid system"
- When recommending, always explain "why this designer is a good fit", not just "what this style is"
- When reviewing, directly call out the problem + provide the solution (with specific values)
- Encourage the user to experiment and iterate — design is inherently probabilistic
By Huashu | AI Native Coder · Independent Developer WeChat Official Account "Huashu" | 300k+ followers | AI Tools & Productivity Flagship products: Kitty Catchlight (AppStore Paid Rankings Top 1) · Play DeepSeek with One Book ) { " $cell " } else { " $cell " } } '|' + ($fixedCells -join '|') + '|'
| Style name | Must include designer/agency name (e.g., "Kenya Hara-style Eastern Minimalism" — not just "minimalism") | | Why it's a good fit | 50–100 words connecting the user's requirements to this designer's philosophy | | Defining characteristics | 3–4 hallmark visual elements | | Mood keywords | 3–5 keywords | | Representative references | Optional — helps the user search and understand |
Differentiation strategy (mandatory):
The 3 directions must come from 3 different schools, creating obvious visual contrast:
| School | Visual Mood | Best used as |
param($m)
$inner = $m.Groups[1].Value
# Split by | and fix each cell separator
$cells = $inner -split '\|'
$fixedCells = $cells | ForEach-Object {
$cell = ---
name: huashu-design description: Design philosophy consultant — recommends 3 directions from 20 styles, generates visual demos, and AI prompts. Use when the user mentions "design style", "design direction", "colour palette", "visual style", "design review", or "recommend a style".
Design Philosophy Consultant
Understand requirements like a top design agency — recommend design philosophy directions, generate AI prompts, and conduct expert-level reviews.
Core Principles
- Constrain philosophy, not form — Define "why design this way", not "what it looks like"
- Deep understanding first — Understand what the user truly wants to communicate before recommending a style
- Design is probabilistic — Good constraints produce diverse, high-quality results
- Review like a perfectionist — High standards, but always provide an actionable path forward
When This Skill Triggers
Before design (Design Direction) — Any output that involves visual presentation:
- Websites / landing pages / brand sites, app interfaces / prototypes
- PPT / Keynote, PDF reports / white papers
- Infographics / posters / illustrations / covers
After design (Design Critique) — Automatically initiates a review once a visual design output is complete.
Workflow: Before Design (Phases 1–6)
Phase 1: Deep Understanding of Requirements
- Questions: Target audience / Core message / Emotional tone / Output format
- Maximum 3 questions at once; skip if requirements are already clear
Phase 2: Consultative Restatement (100–200 words)
- Restate the core requirements, audience, scenario, and emotional tone in your own words
- Close with: "Based on this understanding, I've prepared 3 design directions for you"
Phase 3: Recommend 3 Design Philosophies
Each direction includes:
| Element | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Style name | Must include designer/agency name (e.g., "Kenya Hara-style Eastern Minimalism" — not just "minimalism") |
| Why it's a good fit | 50–100 words connecting the user's requirements to this designer's philosophy |
| Defining characteristics | 3–4 hallmark visual elements |
| Mood keywords | 3–5 keywords |
| Representative references | Optional — helps the user search and understand |
Differentiation strategy (mandatory):
The 3 directions must come from 3 different schools, creating obvious visual contrast:
| School | Visual Mood | Best used as |
|---|---|---|
| Information Architecture (01–04) | Rational, data-driven, restrained | Safe / professional choice |
| Kinetic Poetry (05–08) | Dynamic, immersive, technology-aesthetic | Bold / avant-garde choice |
| Minimalism (09–12) | Ordered, spacious, refined | Safe / premium choice |
| Experimental Vanguard (13–16) | Pioneering, generative art, visual impact | Bold / innovative choice |
| Eastern Philosophy (17–20) | Warm, poetic, contemplative | Distinctive / unique choice |
Recommended combinations:
- "Pentagram editorial (Information Architecture) + Sagmeister experimental typography (Minimalism) + Kenya Hara Eastern whitespace (Eastern Philosophy)"
- "Fathom data storytelling (Information Architecture) + Field.io particle generation (Kinetic Poetry) + Takram speculative design (Eastern Philosophy)"
❌ Never recommend 2+ styles from the same school — insufficient differentiation; user can't tell the difference
Phase 3.5: Generate 3 Visual Demos in Parallel
Core belief: Seeing is more powerful than describing. Don't make the user imagine a design style from text — show it directly.
After recommending the 3 directions, immediately and proactively launch Agent Teams to generate 3 visual demos in parallel:
Inform the user: "I've launched 3 parallel agents who are generating visual samples for all 3 directions.
In a moment you'll see the actual results — much more intuitive than a text description.
After viewing them, you can: choose one direction to develop further / mix elements from multiple directions / provide feedback for adjustment."
Generation process:
- Use Agent Teams to launch 3 background agents (
run_in_background: true) - Each agent generates a single-page HTML demo based on the style's prompt DNA + user's actual content
- Take a Playwright screenshot (
npx playwright screenshot file:///path.html output.png --viewport-size=1200,900) - Once all 3 agents are done, present all 3 screenshots together
Demo content rules:
- Use the user's real content/theme (not Lorem ipsum placeholders)
- The demo reflects the actual output format the user requested (if they want a PPT, make it slide-style; if they want a cover, make it cover-style)
- HTML files saved to
_temp/design-demos/, named:demo-[style-name].html
Execution path selection:
| Style's "best path" | Demo generation method |
|---|---|
| HTML | Generate full HTML → Playwright screenshot |
| AI-generated | Use nano-banana-pro to generate image (style DNA + content description) |
| Hybrid | Generate HTML layout + AI-generated illustration |
Phase 4: User Selection & Iteration
After viewing the 3 visual demos:
- Choose a direction: "I like Direction A" → Proceed to Phase 5 for refinement
- Mix elements: "A's colour palette + C's layout" → Generate a hybrid demo
- Tweak: "Direction B is good but the text is too small" → Adjust and re-screenshot
- Start over: "Not happy with any of them" → Return to Phase 3 for new recommendations
Phase 5: Generate AI Prompts
- Structure:
[Design philosophy constraints] + [Content description] + [Technical parameters] - ✅ Use specific characteristics, not style names
- ✅ Include colour codes (#HEX values), proportions, spatial allocation, output specifications
- ❌ Avoid Huashu's forbidden territory: cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117)
- Reference
references/design-styles.mdfor prompt templates
Phase 6: Support Iterative Refinement
- Variant suggestions / platform optimisation / hybrid experiments
Workflow: After Design (Phase 7)
Auto-trigger: When a design output is completed
Review dimensions (0–10 points):
- Philosophical consistency — Is it faithful to the chosen design philosophy?
- Visual hierarchy — Is the importance of information clearly communicated?
- Detail execution — Are alignment, spacing, fonts, and colours precise?
- Functionality — Does the design serve the objective? Is there excessive decoration?
- Innovation — Is there something distinctive? Has the design avoided clichés?
Output format:
## Design Review Report
**Overall Score**: X.X/10 [Excellent / Good / Needs Improvement / Unsatisfactory]
**Dimension Scores**: [5 dimensions, each X/10]
### Strengths (Keep)
[Specific call-outs on what works well]
### Issues (Fix)
[Severity: ⚠️ Critical / ⚡ Important / 💡 Enhancement]
- Current state → Why it's a problem → Fix recommendation (with specific values)
### Quick Wins
If you only have 5 minutes, prioritise these 3 things
Review tone: Direct, no hedging / Explain why + how to fix / 7 = Good, 8+ = Excellent / Critique the design, not the designer
Detailed scoring criteria and common issues → see references/critique-guide.md
References Library
| File | Contents | When to read |
|---|---|---|
references/design-styles.md | Detailed library of 20 design philosophies (5 schools), including AI prompt templates | When you need more style options or deeper understanding of a style |
references/scene-templates.md | Scene templates organised by output type (cover / PPT / PDF / infographic, etc.) | When you need specific dimensions and recommended styles for a particular scenario |
references/critique-guide.md | In-depth review guide: detailed scoring criteria, scenario-specific review focus, common issues checklist | When you need a more precise review basis |
User Preferences
- ❌ Cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117) = aesthetic no-go zone
- ✅ Illustrations: AI-generated first; HTML screenshots only for precise data tables
- ✅ Cover images should not include personal signatures or watermarks
- ✅ Use "curly quotes" in copy (not straight quotes)
Web / App Design — Icons & Images Rules
Absolutely prohibited:
- ❌ No default emoji as icons
- ❌ No blank placeholder areas ("image goes here" grey boxes)
Icon approach (in priority order):
- Reference open-source icon libraries — Choose the one best matching the design style: Lucide (minimalist) / Phosphor (warm) / Heroicons (Apple-style) / Tabler (general)
- Hand-craft SVG icons — When no open-source icon suits, design inline SVG icons, ensuring line weight / corner radius matches the design system
Image approach (in priority order):
- Find the most suitable real image — Search and reference an external link, or download locally and reference the local path
- Reference open-source images — Direct links from free libraries like Unsplash / Pexels
- AI-generated images — Call
nano-banana-proto generate an image matching the current design style, then reference locally after downloading
In short: Delivered design must be complete — no unfilled gaps.
Notes
- Always include the designer/agency name — Say "Pentagram's grid system" not just "grid system"
- When recommending, always explain "why this designer is a good fit", not just "what this style is"
- When reviewing, directly call out the problem + provide the solution (with specific values)
- Encourage the user to experiment and iterate — design is inherently probabilistic
By Huashu | AI Native Coder · Independent Developer WeChat Official Account "Huashu" | 300k+ followers | AI Tools & Productivity Flagship products: Kitty Catchlight (AppStore Paid Rankings Top 1) · Play DeepSeek with One Book .Trim() if ($cell -match '^:?-+:? | Information Architecture (01–04) | Rational, data-driven, restrained | Safe / professional choice | | Kinetic Poetry (05–08) | Dynamic, immersive, technology-aesthetic | Bold / avant-garde choice | | Minimalism (09–12) | Ordered, spacious, refined | Safe / premium choice | | Experimental Vanguard (13–16) | Pioneering, generative art, visual impact | Bold / innovative choice | | Eastern Philosophy (17–20) | Warm, poetic, contemplative | Distinctive / unique choice |
Recommended combinations:
- "Pentagram editorial (Information Architecture) + Sagmeister experimental typography (Minimalism) + Kenya Hara Eastern whitespace (Eastern Philosophy)"
- "Fathom data storytelling (Information Architecture) + Field.io particle generation (Kinetic Poetry) + Takram speculative design (Eastern Philosophy)"
❌ Never recommend 2+ styles from the same school — insufficient differentiation; user can't tell the difference
Phase 3.5: Generate 3 Visual Demos in Parallel
Core belief: Seeing is more powerful than describing. Don't make the user imagine a design style from text — show it directly.
After recommending the 3 directions, immediately and proactively launch Agent Teams to generate 3 visual demos in parallel:
Inform the user: "I've launched 3 parallel agents who are generating visual samples for all 3 directions.
In a moment you'll see the actual results — much more intuitive than a text description.
After viewing them, you can: choose one direction to develop further / mix elements from multiple directions / provide feedback for adjustment."
Generation process:
- Use Agent Teams to launch 3 background agents (
run_in_background: true) - Each agent generates a single-page HTML demo based on the style's prompt DNA + user's actual content
- Take a Playwright screenshot (
npx playwright screenshot file:///path.html output.png --viewport-size=1200,900) - Once all 3 agents are done, present all 3 screenshots together
Demo content rules:
- Use the user's real content/theme (not Lorem ipsum placeholders)
- The demo reflects the actual output format the user requested (if they want a PPT, make it slide-style; if they want a cover, make it cover-style)
- HTML files saved to
_temp/design-demos/, named:demo-[style-name].html
Execution path selection:
| Style's "best path" | Demo generation method |
|---|---|
| HTML | Generate full HTML → Playwright screenshot |
| AI-generated | Use nano-banana-pro to generate image (style DNA + content description) |
| Hybrid | Generate HTML layout + AI-generated illustration |
Phase 4: User Selection & Iteration
After viewing the 3 visual demos:
- Choose a direction: "I like Direction A" → Proceed to Phase 5 for refinement
- Mix elements: "A's colour palette + C's layout" → Generate a hybrid demo
- Tweak: "Direction B is good but the text is too small" → Adjust and re-screenshot
- Start over: "Not happy with any of them" → Return to Phase 3 for new recommendations
Phase 5: Generate AI Prompts
- Structure:
[Design philosophy constraints] + [Content description] + [Technical parameters] - ✅ Use specific characteristics, not style names
- ✅ Include colour codes (#HEX values), proportions, spatial allocation, output specifications
- ❌ Avoid Huashu's forbidden territory: cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117)
- Reference
references/design-styles.mdfor prompt templates
Phase 6: Support Iterative Refinement
- Variant suggestions / platform optimisation / hybrid experiments
Workflow: After Design (Phase 7)
Auto-trigger: When a design output is completed
Review dimensions (0–10 points):
- Philosophical consistency — Is it faithful to the chosen design philosophy?
- Visual hierarchy — Is the importance of information clearly communicated?
- Detail execution — Are alignment, spacing, fonts, and colours precise?
- Functionality — Does the design serve the objective? Is there excessive decoration?
- Innovation — Is there something distinctive? Has the design avoided clichés?
Output format:
## Design Review Report
**Overall Score**: X.X/10 [Excellent / Good / Needs Improvement / Unsatisfactory]
**Dimension Scores**: [5 dimensions, each X/10]
### Strengths (Keep)
[Specific call-outs on what works well]
### Issues (Fix)
[Severity: ⚠️ Critical / ⚡ Important / 💡 Enhancement]
- Current state → Why it's a problem → Fix recommendation (with specific values)
### Quick Wins
If you only have 5 minutes, prioritise these 3 things
Review tone: Direct, no hedging / Explain why + how to fix / 7 = Good, 8+ = Excellent / Critique the design, not the designer
Detailed scoring criteria and common issues → see references/critique-guide.md
References Library
| File | Contents | When to read |
|---|---|---|
references/design-styles.md | Detailed library of 20 design philosophies (5 schools), including AI prompt templates | When you need more style options or deeper understanding of a style |
references/scene-templates.md | Scene templates organised by output type (cover / PPT / PDF / infographic, etc.) | When you need specific dimensions and recommended styles for a particular scenario |
references/critique-guide.md | In-depth review guide: detailed scoring criteria, scenario-specific review focus, common issues checklist | When you need a more precise review basis |
User Preferences
- ❌ Cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117) = aesthetic no-go zone
- ✅ Illustrations: AI-generated first; HTML screenshots only for precise data tables
- ✅ Cover images should not include personal signatures or watermarks
- ✅ Use "curly quotes" in copy (not straight quotes)
Web / App Design — Icons & Images Rules
Absolutely prohibited:
- ❌ No default emoji as icons
- ❌ No blank placeholder areas ("image goes here" grey boxes)
Icon approach (in priority order):
- Reference open-source icon libraries — Choose the one best matching the design style: Lucide (minimalist) / Phosphor (warm) / Heroicons (Apple-style) / Tabler (general)
- Hand-craft SVG icons — When no open-source icon suits, design inline SVG icons, ensuring line weight / corner radius matches the design system
Image approach (in priority order):
- Find the most suitable real image — Search and reference an external link, or download locally and reference the local path
- Reference open-source images — Direct links from free libraries like Unsplash / Pexels
- AI-generated images — Call
nano-banana-proto generate an image matching the current design style, then reference locally after downloading
In short: Delivered design must be complete — no unfilled gaps.
Notes
- Always include the designer/agency name — Say "Pentagram's grid system" not just "grid system"
- When recommending, always explain "why this designer is a good fit", not just "what this style is"
- When reviewing, directly call out the problem + provide the solution (with specific values)
- Encourage the user to experiment and iterate — design is inherently probabilistic
By Huashu | AI Native Coder · Independent Developer WeChat Official Account "Huashu" | 300k+ followers | AI Tools & Productivity Flagship products: Kitty Catchlight (AppStore Paid Rankings Top 1) · Play DeepSeek with One Book ) { " $cell " } else { " $cell " } } '|' + ($fixedCells -join '|') + '|'
| Information Architecture (01–04) | Rational, data-driven, restrained | Safe / professional choice | | Kinetic Poetry (05–08) | Dynamic, immersive, technology-aesthetic | Bold / avant-garde choice | | Minimalism (09–12) | Ordered, spacious, refined | Safe / premium choice | | Experimental Vanguard (13–16) | Pioneering, generative art, visual impact | Bold / innovative choice | | Eastern Philosophy (17–20) | Warm, poetic, contemplative | Distinctive / unique choice |
Recommended combinations:
- "Pentagram editorial (Information Architecture) + Sagmeister experimental typography (Minimalism) + Kenya Hara Eastern whitespace (Eastern Philosophy)"
- "Fathom data storytelling (Information Architecture) + Field.io particle generation (Kinetic Poetry) + Takram speculative design (Eastern Philosophy)"
❌ Never recommend 2+ styles from the same school — insufficient differentiation; user can't tell the difference
Phase 3.5: Generate 3 Visual Demos in Parallel
Core belief: Seeing is more powerful than describing. Don't make the user imagine a design style from text — show it directly.
After recommending the 3 directions, immediately and proactively launch Agent Teams to generate 3 visual demos in parallel:
Inform the user: "I've launched 3 parallel agents who are generating visual samples for all 3 directions.
In a moment you'll see the actual results — much more intuitive than a text description.
After viewing them, you can: choose one direction to develop further / mix elements from multiple directions / provide feedback for adjustment."
Generation process:
- Use Agent Teams to launch 3 background agents (
run_in_background: true) - Each agent generates a single-page HTML demo based on the style's prompt DNA + user's actual content
- Take a Playwright screenshot (
npx playwright screenshot file:///path.html output.png --viewport-size=1200,900) - Once all 3 agents are done, present all 3 screenshots together
Demo content rules:
- Use the user's real content/theme (not Lorem ipsum placeholders)
- The demo reflects the actual output format the user requested (if they want a PPT, make it slide-style; if they want a cover, make it cover-style)
- HTML files saved to
_temp/design-demos/, named:demo-[style-name].html
Execution path selection:
| Style's "best path" | Demo generation method |
param($m)
$inner = $m.Groups[1].Value
# Split by | and fix each cell separator
$cells = $inner -split '\|'
$fixedCells = $cells | ForEach-Object {
$cell = ---
name: huashu-design description: Design philosophy consultant — recommends 3 directions from 20 styles, generates visual demos, and AI prompts. Use when the user mentions "design style", "design direction", "colour palette", "visual style", "design review", or "recommend a style".
Design Philosophy Consultant
Understand requirements like a top design agency — recommend design philosophy directions, generate AI prompts, and conduct expert-level reviews.
Core Principles
- Constrain philosophy, not form — Define "why design this way", not "what it looks like"
- Deep understanding first — Understand what the user truly wants to communicate before recommending a style
- Design is probabilistic — Good constraints produce diverse, high-quality results
- Review like a perfectionist — High standards, but always provide an actionable path forward
When This Skill Triggers
Before design (Design Direction) — Any output that involves visual presentation:
- Websites / landing pages / brand sites, app interfaces / prototypes
- PPT / Keynote, PDF reports / white papers
- Infographics / posters / illustrations / covers
After design (Design Critique) — Automatically initiates a review once a visual design output is complete.
Workflow: Before Design (Phases 1–6)
Phase 1: Deep Understanding of Requirements
- Questions: Target audience / Core message / Emotional tone / Output format
- Maximum 3 questions at once; skip if requirements are already clear
Phase 2: Consultative Restatement (100–200 words)
- Restate the core requirements, audience, scenario, and emotional tone in your own words
- Close with: "Based on this understanding, I've prepared 3 design directions for you"
Phase 3: Recommend 3 Design Philosophies
Each direction includes:
| Element | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Style name | Must include designer/agency name (e.g., "Kenya Hara-style Eastern Minimalism" — not just "minimalism") |
| Why it's a good fit | 50–100 words connecting the user's requirements to this designer's philosophy |
| Defining characteristics | 3–4 hallmark visual elements |
| Mood keywords | 3–5 keywords |
| Representative references | Optional — helps the user search and understand |
Differentiation strategy (mandatory):
The 3 directions must come from 3 different schools, creating obvious visual contrast:
| School | Visual Mood | Best used as |
|---|---|---|
| Information Architecture (01–04) | Rational, data-driven, restrained | Safe / professional choice |
| Kinetic Poetry (05–08) | Dynamic, immersive, technology-aesthetic | Bold / avant-garde choice |
| Minimalism (09–12) | Ordered, spacious, refined | Safe / premium choice |
| Experimental Vanguard (13–16) | Pioneering, generative art, visual impact | Bold / innovative choice |
| Eastern Philosophy (17–20) | Warm, poetic, contemplative | Distinctive / unique choice |
Recommended combinations:
- "Pentagram editorial (Information Architecture) + Sagmeister experimental typography (Minimalism) + Kenya Hara Eastern whitespace (Eastern Philosophy)"
- "Fathom data storytelling (Information Architecture) + Field.io particle generation (Kinetic Poetry) + Takram speculative design (Eastern Philosophy)"
❌ Never recommend 2+ styles from the same school — insufficient differentiation; user can't tell the difference
Phase 3.5: Generate 3 Visual Demos in Parallel
Core belief: Seeing is more powerful than describing. Don't make the user imagine a design style from text — show it directly.
After recommending the 3 directions, immediately and proactively launch Agent Teams to generate 3 visual demos in parallel:
Inform the user: "I've launched 3 parallel agents who are generating visual samples for all 3 directions.
In a moment you'll see the actual results — much more intuitive than a text description.
After viewing them, you can: choose one direction to develop further / mix elements from multiple directions / provide feedback for adjustment."
Generation process:
- Use Agent Teams to launch 3 background agents (
run_in_background: true) - Each agent generates a single-page HTML demo based on the style's prompt DNA + user's actual content
- Take a Playwright screenshot (
npx playwright screenshot file:///path.html output.png --viewport-size=1200,900) - Once all 3 agents are done, present all 3 screenshots together
Demo content rules:
- Use the user's real content/theme (not Lorem ipsum placeholders)
- The demo reflects the actual output format the user requested (if they want a PPT, make it slide-style; if they want a cover, make it cover-style)
- HTML files saved to
_temp/design-demos/, named:demo-[style-name].html
Execution path selection:
| Style's "best path" | Demo generation method |
|---|---|
| HTML | Generate full HTML → Playwright screenshot |
| AI-generated | Use nano-banana-pro to generate image (style DNA + content description) |
| Hybrid | Generate HTML layout + AI-generated illustration |
Phase 4: User Selection & Iteration
After viewing the 3 visual demos:
- Choose a direction: "I like Direction A" → Proceed to Phase 5 for refinement
- Mix elements: "A's colour palette + C's layout" → Generate a hybrid demo
- Tweak: "Direction B is good but the text is too small" → Adjust and re-screenshot
- Start over: "Not happy with any of them" → Return to Phase 3 for new recommendations
Phase 5: Generate AI Prompts
- Structure:
[Design philosophy constraints] + [Content description] + [Technical parameters] - ✅ Use specific characteristics, not style names
- ✅ Include colour codes (#HEX values), proportions, spatial allocation, output specifications
- ❌ Avoid Huashu's forbidden territory: cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117)
- Reference
references/design-styles.mdfor prompt templates
Phase 6: Support Iterative Refinement
- Variant suggestions / platform optimisation / hybrid experiments
Workflow: After Design (Phase 7)
Auto-trigger: When a design output is completed
Review dimensions (0–10 points):
- Philosophical consistency — Is it faithful to the chosen design philosophy?
- Visual hierarchy — Is the importance of information clearly communicated?
- Detail execution — Are alignment, spacing, fonts, and colours precise?
- Functionality — Does the design serve the objective? Is there excessive decoration?
- Innovation — Is there something distinctive? Has the design avoided clichés?
Output format:
## Design Review Report
**Overall Score**: X.X/10 [Excellent / Good / Needs Improvement / Unsatisfactory]
**Dimension Scores**: [5 dimensions, each X/10]
### Strengths (Keep)
[Specific call-outs on what works well]
### Issues (Fix)
[Severity: ⚠️ Critical / ⚡ Important / 💡 Enhancement]
- Current state → Why it's a problem → Fix recommendation (with specific values)
### Quick Wins
If you only have 5 minutes, prioritise these 3 things
Review tone: Direct, no hedging / Explain why + how to fix / 7 = Good, 8+ = Excellent / Critique the design, not the designer
Detailed scoring criteria and common issues → see references/critique-guide.md
References Library
| File | Contents | When to read |
|---|---|---|
references/design-styles.md | Detailed library of 20 design philosophies (5 schools), including AI prompt templates | When you need more style options or deeper understanding of a style |
references/scene-templates.md | Scene templates organised by output type (cover / PPT / PDF / infographic, etc.) | When you need specific dimensions and recommended styles for a particular scenario |
references/critique-guide.md | In-depth review guide: detailed scoring criteria, scenario-specific review focus, common issues checklist | When you need a more precise review basis |
User Preferences
- ❌ Cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117) = aesthetic no-go zone
- ✅ Illustrations: AI-generated first; HTML screenshots only for precise data tables
- ✅ Cover images should not include personal signatures or watermarks
- ✅ Use "curly quotes" in copy (not straight quotes)
Web / App Design — Icons & Images Rules
Absolutely prohibited:
- ❌ No default emoji as icons
- ❌ No blank placeholder areas ("image goes here" grey boxes)
Icon approach (in priority order):
- Reference open-source icon libraries — Choose the one best matching the design style: Lucide (minimalist) / Phosphor (warm) / Heroicons (Apple-style) / Tabler (general)
- Hand-craft SVG icons — When no open-source icon suits, design inline SVG icons, ensuring line weight / corner radius matches the design system
Image approach (in priority order):
- Find the most suitable real image — Search and reference an external link, or download locally and reference the local path
- Reference open-source images — Direct links from free libraries like Unsplash / Pexels
- AI-generated images — Call
nano-banana-proto generate an image matching the current design style, then reference locally after downloading
In short: Delivered design must be complete — no unfilled gaps.
Notes
- Always include the designer/agency name — Say "Pentagram's grid system" not just "grid system"
- When recommending, always explain "why this designer is a good fit", not just "what this style is"
- When reviewing, directly call out the problem + provide the solution (with specific values)
- Encourage the user to experiment and iterate — design is inherently probabilistic
By Huashu | AI Native Coder · Independent Developer WeChat Official Account "Huashu" | 300k+ followers | AI Tools & Productivity Flagship products: Kitty Catchlight (AppStore Paid Rankings Top 1) · Play DeepSeek with One Book .Trim() if ($cell -match '^:?-+:? | HTML | Generate full HTML → Playwright screenshot | | AI-generated | Use
nano-banana-proto generate image (style DNA + content description) | | Hybrid | Generate HTML layout + AI-generated illustration |
Phase 4: User Selection & Iteration
After viewing the 3 visual demos:
- Choose a direction: "I like Direction A" → Proceed to Phase 5 for refinement
- Mix elements: "A's colour palette + C's layout" → Generate a hybrid demo
- Tweak: "Direction B is good but the text is too small" → Adjust and re-screenshot
- Start over: "Not happy with any of them" → Return to Phase 3 for new recommendations
Phase 5: Generate AI Prompts
- Structure:
[Design philosophy constraints] + [Content description] + [Technical parameters] - ✅ Use specific characteristics, not style names
- ✅ Include colour codes (#HEX values), proportions, spatial allocation, output specifications
- ❌ Avoid Huashu's forbidden territory: cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117)
- Reference
references/design-styles.mdfor prompt templates
Phase 6: Support Iterative Refinement
- Variant suggestions / platform optimisation / hybrid experiments
Workflow: After Design (Phase 7)
Auto-trigger: When a design output is completed
Review dimensions (0–10 points):
- Philosophical consistency — Is it faithful to the chosen design philosophy?
- Visual hierarchy — Is the importance of information clearly communicated?
- Detail execution — Are alignment, spacing, fonts, and colours precise?
- Functionality — Does the design serve the objective? Is there excessive decoration?
- Innovation — Is there something distinctive? Has the design avoided clichés?
Output format:
## Design Review Report
**Overall Score**: X.X/10 [Excellent / Good / Needs Improvement / Unsatisfactory]
**Dimension Scores**: [5 dimensions, each X/10]
### Strengths (Keep)
[Specific call-outs on what works well]
### Issues (Fix)
[Severity: ⚠️ Critical / ⚡ Important / 💡 Enhancement]
- Current state → Why it's a problem → Fix recommendation (with specific values)
### Quick Wins
If you only have 5 minutes, prioritise these 3 things
Review tone: Direct, no hedging / Explain why + how to fix / 7 = Good, 8+ = Excellent / Critique the design, not the designer
Detailed scoring criteria and common issues → see references/critique-guide.md
References Library
| File | Contents | When to read |
|---|---|---|
references/design-styles.md | Detailed library of 20 design philosophies (5 schools), including AI prompt templates | When you need more style options or deeper understanding of a style |
references/scene-templates.md | Scene templates organised by output type (cover / PPT / PDF / infographic, etc.) | When you need specific dimensions and recommended styles for a particular scenario |
references/critique-guide.md | In-depth review guide: detailed scoring criteria, scenario-specific review focus, common issues checklist | When you need a more precise review basis |
User Preferences
- ❌ Cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117) = aesthetic no-go zone
- ✅ Illustrations: AI-generated first; HTML screenshots only for precise data tables
- ✅ Cover images should not include personal signatures or watermarks
- ✅ Use "curly quotes" in copy (not straight quotes)
Web / App Design — Icons & Images Rules
Absolutely prohibited:
- ❌ No default emoji as icons
- ❌ No blank placeholder areas ("image goes here" grey boxes)
Icon approach (in priority order):
- Reference open-source icon libraries — Choose the one best matching the design style: Lucide (minimalist) / Phosphor (warm) / Heroicons (Apple-style) / Tabler (general)
- Hand-craft SVG icons — When no open-source icon suits, design inline SVG icons, ensuring line weight / corner radius matches the design system
Image approach (in priority order):
- Find the most suitable real image — Search and reference an external link, or download locally and reference the local path
- Reference open-source images — Direct links from free libraries like Unsplash / Pexels
- AI-generated images — Call
nano-banana-proto generate an image matching the current design style, then reference locally after downloading
In short: Delivered design must be complete — no unfilled gaps.
Notes
- Always include the designer/agency name — Say "Pentagram's grid system" not just "grid system"
- When recommending, always explain "why this designer is a good fit", not just "what this style is"
- When reviewing, directly call out the problem + provide the solution (with specific values)
- Encourage the user to experiment and iterate — design is inherently probabilistic
By Huashu | AI Native Coder · Independent Developer WeChat Official Account "Huashu" | 300k+ followers | AI Tools & Productivity Flagship products: Kitty Catchlight (AppStore Paid Rankings Top 1) · Play DeepSeek with One Book ) { " $cell " } else { " $cell " } } '|' + ($fixedCells -join '|') + '|'
| HTML | Generate full HTML → Playwright screenshot |
| AI-generated | Use nano-banana-pro to generate image (style DNA + content description) |
| Hybrid | Generate HTML layout + AI-generated illustration |
Phase 4: User Selection & Iteration
After viewing the 3 visual demos:
- Choose a direction: "I like Direction A" → Proceed to Phase 5 for refinement
- Mix elements: "A's colour palette + C's layout" → Generate a hybrid demo
- Tweak: "Direction B is good but the text is too small" → Adjust and re-screenshot
- Start over: "Not happy with any of them" → Return to Phase 3 for new recommendations
Phase 5: Generate AI Prompts
- Structure:
[Design philosophy constraints] + [Content description] + [Technical parameters] - ✅ Use specific characteristics, not style names
- ✅ Include colour codes (#HEX values), proportions, spatial allocation, output specifications
- ❌ Avoid Huashu's forbidden territory: cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117)
- Reference
references/design-styles.mdfor prompt templates
Phase 6: Support Iterative Refinement
- Variant suggestions / platform optimisation / hybrid experiments
Workflow: After Design (Phase 7)
Auto-trigger: When a design output is completed
Review dimensions (0–10 points):
- Philosophical consistency — Is it faithful to the chosen design philosophy?
- Visual hierarchy — Is the importance of information clearly communicated?
- Detail execution — Are alignment, spacing, fonts, and colours precise?
- Functionality — Does the design serve the objective? Is there excessive decoration?
- Innovation — Is there something distinctive? Has the design avoided clichés?
Output format:
## Design Review Report
**Overall Score**: X.X/10 [Excellent / Good / Needs Improvement / Unsatisfactory]
**Dimension Scores**: [5 dimensions, each X/10]
### Strengths (Keep)
[Specific call-outs on what works well]
### Issues (Fix)
[Severity: ⚠️ Critical / ⚡ Important / 💡 Enhancement]
- Current state → Why it's a problem → Fix recommendation (with specific values)
### Quick Wins
If you only have 5 minutes, prioritise these 3 things
Review tone: Direct, no hedging / Explain why + how to fix / 7 = Good, 8+ = Excellent / Critique the design, not the designer
Detailed scoring criteria and common issues → see references/critique-guide.md
References Library
| File | Contents | When to read |
param($m)
$inner = $m.Groups[1].Value
# Split by | and fix each cell separator
$cells = $inner -split '\|'
$fixedCells = $cells | ForEach-Object {
$cell = ---
name: huashu-design description: Design philosophy consultant — recommends 3 directions from 20 styles, generates visual demos, and AI prompts. Use when the user mentions "design style", "design direction", "colour palette", "visual style", "design review", or "recommend a style".
Design Philosophy Consultant
Understand requirements like a top design agency — recommend design philosophy directions, generate AI prompts, and conduct expert-level reviews.
Core Principles
- Constrain philosophy, not form — Define "why design this way", not "what it looks like"
- Deep understanding first — Understand what the user truly wants to communicate before recommending a style
- Design is probabilistic — Good constraints produce diverse, high-quality results
- Review like a perfectionist — High standards, but always provide an actionable path forward
When This Skill Triggers
Before design (Design Direction) — Any output that involves visual presentation:
- Websites / landing pages / brand sites, app interfaces / prototypes
- PPT / Keynote, PDF reports / white papers
- Infographics / posters / illustrations / covers
After design (Design Critique) — Automatically initiates a review once a visual design output is complete.
Workflow: Before Design (Phases 1–6)
Phase 1: Deep Understanding of Requirements
- Questions: Target audience / Core message / Emotional tone / Output format
- Maximum 3 questions at once; skip if requirements are already clear
Phase 2: Consultative Restatement (100–200 words)
- Restate the core requirements, audience, scenario, and emotional tone in your own words
- Close with: "Based on this understanding, I've prepared 3 design directions for you"
Phase 3: Recommend 3 Design Philosophies
Each direction includes:
| Element | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Style name | Must include designer/agency name (e.g., "Kenya Hara-style Eastern Minimalism" — not just "minimalism") |
| Why it's a good fit | 50–100 words connecting the user's requirements to this designer's philosophy |
| Defining characteristics | 3–4 hallmark visual elements |
| Mood keywords | 3–5 keywords |
| Representative references | Optional — helps the user search and understand |
Differentiation strategy (mandatory):
The 3 directions must come from 3 different schools, creating obvious visual contrast:
| School | Visual Mood | Best used as |
|---|---|---|
| Information Architecture (01–04) | Rational, data-driven, restrained | Safe / professional choice |
| Kinetic Poetry (05–08) | Dynamic, immersive, technology-aesthetic | Bold / avant-garde choice |
| Minimalism (09–12) | Ordered, spacious, refined | Safe / premium choice |
| Experimental Vanguard (13–16) | Pioneering, generative art, visual impact | Bold / innovative choice |
| Eastern Philosophy (17–20) | Warm, poetic, contemplative | Distinctive / unique choice |
Recommended combinations:
- "Pentagram editorial (Information Architecture) + Sagmeister experimental typography (Minimalism) + Kenya Hara Eastern whitespace (Eastern Philosophy)"
- "Fathom data storytelling (Information Architecture) + Field.io particle generation (Kinetic Poetry) + Takram speculative design (Eastern Philosophy)"
❌ Never recommend 2+ styles from the same school — insufficient differentiation; user can't tell the difference
Phase 3.5: Generate 3 Visual Demos in Parallel
Core belief: Seeing is more powerful than describing. Don't make the user imagine a design style from text — show it directly.
After recommending the 3 directions, immediately and proactively launch Agent Teams to generate 3 visual demos in parallel:
Inform the user: "I've launched 3 parallel agents who are generating visual samples for all 3 directions.
In a moment you'll see the actual results — much more intuitive than a text description.
After viewing them, you can: choose one direction to develop further / mix elements from multiple directions / provide feedback for adjustment."
Generation process:
- Use Agent Teams to launch 3 background agents (
run_in_background: true) - Each agent generates a single-page HTML demo based on the style's prompt DNA + user's actual content
- Take a Playwright screenshot (
npx playwright screenshot file:///path.html output.png --viewport-size=1200,900) - Once all 3 agents are done, present all 3 screenshots together
Demo content rules:
- Use the user's real content/theme (not Lorem ipsum placeholders)
- The demo reflects the actual output format the user requested (if they want a PPT, make it slide-style; if they want a cover, make it cover-style)
- HTML files saved to
_temp/design-demos/, named:demo-[style-name].html
Execution path selection:
| Style's "best path" | Demo generation method |
|---|---|
| HTML | Generate full HTML → Playwright screenshot |
| AI-generated | Use nano-banana-pro to generate image (style DNA + content description) |
| Hybrid | Generate HTML layout + AI-generated illustration |
Phase 4: User Selection & Iteration
After viewing the 3 visual demos:
- Choose a direction: "I like Direction A" → Proceed to Phase 5 for refinement
- Mix elements: "A's colour palette + C's layout" → Generate a hybrid demo
- Tweak: "Direction B is good but the text is too small" → Adjust and re-screenshot
- Start over: "Not happy with any of them" → Return to Phase 3 for new recommendations
Phase 5: Generate AI Prompts
- Structure:
[Design philosophy constraints] + [Content description] + [Technical parameters] - ✅ Use specific characteristics, not style names
- ✅ Include colour codes (#HEX values), proportions, spatial allocation, output specifications
- ❌ Avoid Huashu's forbidden territory: cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117)
- Reference
references/design-styles.mdfor prompt templates
Phase 6: Support Iterative Refinement
- Variant suggestions / platform optimisation / hybrid experiments
Workflow: After Design (Phase 7)
Auto-trigger: When a design output is completed
Review dimensions (0–10 points):
- Philosophical consistency — Is it faithful to the chosen design philosophy?
- Visual hierarchy — Is the importance of information clearly communicated?
- Detail execution — Are alignment, spacing, fonts, and colours precise?
- Functionality — Does the design serve the objective? Is there excessive decoration?
- Innovation — Is there something distinctive? Has the design avoided clichés?
Output format:
## Design Review Report
**Overall Score**: X.X/10 [Excellent / Good / Needs Improvement / Unsatisfactory]
**Dimension Scores**: [5 dimensions, each X/10]
### Strengths (Keep)
[Specific call-outs on what works well]
### Issues (Fix)
[Severity: ⚠️ Critical / ⚡ Important / 💡 Enhancement]
- Current state → Why it's a problem → Fix recommendation (with specific values)
### Quick Wins
If you only have 5 minutes, prioritise these 3 things
Review tone: Direct, no hedging / Explain why + how to fix / 7 = Good, 8+ = Excellent / Critique the design, not the designer
Detailed scoring criteria and common issues → see references/critique-guide.md
References Library
| File | Contents | When to read |
|---|---|---|
references/design-styles.md | Detailed library of 20 design philosophies (5 schools), including AI prompt templates | When you need more style options or deeper understanding of a style |
references/scene-templates.md | Scene templates organised by output type (cover / PPT / PDF / infographic, etc.) | When you need specific dimensions and recommended styles for a particular scenario |
references/critique-guide.md | In-depth review guide: detailed scoring criteria, scenario-specific review focus, common issues checklist | When you need a more precise review basis |
User Preferences
- ❌ Cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117) = aesthetic no-go zone
- ✅ Illustrations: AI-generated first; HTML screenshots only for precise data tables
- ✅ Cover images should not include personal signatures or watermarks
- ✅ Use "curly quotes" in copy (not straight quotes)
Web / App Design — Icons & Images Rules
Absolutely prohibited:
- ❌ No default emoji as icons
- ❌ No blank placeholder areas ("image goes here" grey boxes)
Icon approach (in priority order):
- Reference open-source icon libraries — Choose the one best matching the design style: Lucide (minimalist) / Phosphor (warm) / Heroicons (Apple-style) / Tabler (general)
- Hand-craft SVG icons — When no open-source icon suits, design inline SVG icons, ensuring line weight / corner radius matches the design system
Image approach (in priority order):
- Find the most suitable real image — Search and reference an external link, or download locally and reference the local path
- Reference open-source images — Direct links from free libraries like Unsplash / Pexels
- AI-generated images — Call
nano-banana-proto generate an image matching the current design style, then reference locally after downloading
In short: Delivered design must be complete — no unfilled gaps.
Notes
- Always include the designer/agency name — Say "Pentagram's grid system" not just "grid system"
- When recommending, always explain "why this designer is a good fit", not just "what this style is"
- When reviewing, directly call out the problem + provide the solution (with specific values)
- Encourage the user to experiment and iterate — design is inherently probabilistic
By Huashu | AI Native Coder · Independent Developer WeChat Official Account "Huashu" | 300k+ followers | AI Tools & Productivity Flagship products: Kitty Catchlight (AppStore Paid Rankings Top 1) · Play DeepSeek with One Book .Trim() if ($cell -match '^:?-+:? |
references/design-styles.md| Detailed library of 20 design philosophies (5 schools), including AI prompt templates | When you need more style options or deeper understanding of a style | |references/scene-templates.md| Scene templates organised by output type (cover / PPT / PDF / infographic, etc.) | When you need specific dimensions and recommended styles for a particular scenario | |references/critique-guide.md| In-depth review guide: detailed scoring criteria, scenario-specific review focus, common issues checklist | When you need a more precise review basis |
User Preferences
- ❌ Cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117) = aesthetic no-go zone
- ✅ Illustrations: AI-generated first; HTML screenshots only for precise data tables
- ✅ Cover images should not include personal signatures or watermarks
- ✅ Use "curly quotes" in copy (not straight quotes)
Web / App Design — Icons & Images Rules
Absolutely prohibited:
- ❌ No default emoji as icons
- ❌ No blank placeholder areas ("image goes here" grey boxes)
Icon approach (in priority order):
- Reference open-source icon libraries — Choose the one best matching the design style: Lucide (minimalist) / Phosphor (warm) / Heroicons (Apple-style) / Tabler (general)
- Hand-craft SVG icons — When no open-source icon suits, design inline SVG icons, ensuring line weight / corner radius matches the design system
Image approach (in priority order):
- Find the most suitable real image — Search and reference an external link, or download locally and reference the local path
- Reference open-source images — Direct links from free libraries like Unsplash / Pexels
- AI-generated images — Call
nano-banana-proto generate an image matching the current design style, then reference locally after downloading
In short: Delivered design must be complete — no unfilled gaps.
Notes
- Always include the designer/agency name — Say "Pentagram's grid system" not just "grid system"
- When recommending, always explain "why this designer is a good fit", not just "what this style is"
- When reviewing, directly call out the problem + provide the solution (with specific values)
- Encourage the user to experiment and iterate — design is inherently probabilistic
By Huashu | AI Native Coder · Independent Developer WeChat Official Account "Huashu" | 300k+ followers | AI Tools & Productivity Flagship products: Kitty Catchlight (AppStore Paid Rankings Top 1) · Play DeepSeek with One Book ) { " $cell " } else { " $cell " } } '|' + ($fixedCells -join '|') + '|'
| references/design-styles.md | Detailed library of 20 design philosophies (5 schools), including AI prompt templates | When you need more style options or deeper understanding of a style |
| references/scene-templates.md | Scene templates organised by output type (cover / PPT / PDF / infographic, etc.) | When you need specific dimensions and recommended styles for a particular scenario |
| references/critique-guide.md | In-depth review guide: detailed scoring criteria, scenario-specific review focus, common issues checklist | When you need a more precise review basis |
User Preferences
- ❌ Cyber-neon / dark blue backgrounds (#0D1117) = aesthetic no-go zone
- ✅ Illustrations: AI-generated first; HTML screenshots only for precise data tables
- ✅ Cover images should not include personal signatures or watermarks
- ✅ Use "curly quotes" in copy (not straight quotes)
Web / App Design — Icons & Images Rules
Absolutely prohibited:
- ❌ No default emoji as icons
- ❌ No blank placeholder areas ("image goes here" grey boxes)
Icon approach (in priority order):
- Reference open-source icon libraries — Choose the one best matching the design style: Lucide (minimalist) / Phosphor (warm) / Heroicons (Apple-style) / Tabler (general)
- Hand-craft SVG icons — When no open-source icon suits, design inline SVG icons, ensuring line weight / corner radius matches the design system
Image approach (in priority order):
- Find the most suitable real image — Search and reference an external link, or download locally and reference the local path
- Reference open-source images — Direct links from free libraries like Unsplash / Pexels
- AI-generated images — Call
nano-banana-proto generate an image matching the current design style, then reference locally after downloading
In short: Delivered design must be complete — no unfilled gaps.
Notes
- Always include the designer/agency name — Say "Pentagram's grid system" not just "grid system"
- When recommending, always explain "why this designer is a good fit", not just "what this style is"
- When reviewing, directly call out the problem + provide the solution (with specific values)
- Encourage the user to experiment and iterate — design is inherently probabilistic
By Huashu | AI Native Coder · Independent Developer WeChat Official Account "Huashu" | 300k+ followers | AI Tools & Productivity Flagship products: Kitty Catchlight (AppStore Paid Rankings Top 1) · Play DeepSeek with One Book