version: "1.0.1" name: ss-score description: Score a visual artifact's implementation quality 0-100 against its composed StyleSeed rule set — category breakdown, evidence, and prioritized fixes. argument-hint: "[file, directory, or artifact manifest]" allowed-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash

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, 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 × 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.

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 (−6): operations-console needs explicit functional groups, while editorial-reading should not be forced into cards; 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 × 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:

1. Score the just-generated UI.
2. If < 80, apply the "fix first" list (use /ss-review to make the edits), then re-score.
3. Repeat up to ~3×, or until ≥ 80.
4. 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.