Design frameworks that let regulated teams ship AI-built software that passes review. eBay, Microsoft, Riot Games, Department of War. Free audit: link below.
I'm Jeff. I've run Cartisien, a design and engineering studio, since 2007.
What I post about: AI tools now ship screens faster than anyone can review them. The design rules live in someone's head or a 40-page PDF, so the product drifts.
I write about closing that gap with design rules your agents and engineers can actually check against.
If you lead product or engineering at a software company in a regulated space, follow along. And tell me: which screen does your team argue about most?
The customer-facing copy never got reviewed.
The agent wrote the empty state and error message. The team checked the diff, demoed the happy path, and shipped both without reading them in context.
Then support forwarded a screenshot.
Who owns the issue now??
Generate a settings screen with AI.
The first version looks finished.
Then a user has no saved preferences, loses access, or needs to undo a change, and the screen has nowhere to go.
The demo looked fast because it skipped the states that make software usable.
Review the empty, error, and recovery states before celebrating the generated UI.
CSS just got a random() function. Most products have been shipping it for years.
Smashing pitches it for playful imperfection, which is fine on a portfolio site. But in your product, random is already the house style. The agent picks a corner radius per screen, the settings pages use three slightly different grays, and the ticket about it got closed as won't fix.
Imperfection is only playful when somebody chose it. Nobody at your company chose that gray.
Heads of product: name one visual value in your app that someone decided on purpose this year. I'll wait.
@maoconsult511 Patch speed matters the most right now, but agent permissions are the boundary no one knows how to get right. Its all a crap shoot at this point.
@aaliya_va@GammaApp I feel like a lot of apps people build solve a very specific problem close to the builder/founder.
They see the signal is so loud they think it resonates with everyone, and everyone already understands what their solution does.
"The new brand is approved. Why is engineering asking for six weeks?"
Because the old blue is typed directly into files nobody remembers, plus the email templates and the PDF invoices. Rebrands don't fail in the deck. They fail in the codebase, and the new logo ends up live next to the old buttons for a while.
CMOs planning a rebrand: before the agency presents, ask engineering how many places the brand color is written down.