Quality Gates Reference¶

□ At least 2 distinct personas identified
□ Each persona has: role, quote, goals (3), frustrations (3), context
□ At least 3 JTBD statements in correct format
□ JTBD statements focus on outcomes, not features
□ At least 2 realistic usage scenarios documented
□ Scenarios cover both typical and edge cases
□ Key insights summarized and actionable
□ Could a designer understand users from this alone?

□ Problem statement follows: "[User] needs [goal] because [insight], but [obstacle]"
□ Problem focused on user need, not a specific solution
□ At least 3 success metrics defined
□ Each metric is Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound
□ Constraints documented: technical, design system, accessibility, time
□ At least 5 "How Might We" questions generated
□ HMW questions open-ended, not leading to specific solutions
□ User needs prioritized (must-have vs nice-to-have)

□ At least 3 different solution approaches explored
□ Each solution has pros and cons documented
□ Solutions evaluated against consistent criteria
□ At least 1 complete user flow (steps, decisions, outcomes)
□ User flows cover happy path AND edge cases
□ Information architecture defines primary/secondary/tertiary content
□ One solution selected with clear rationale
□ Rationale ties back to user needs and constraints
□ Risks identified with mitigation strategies
□ Open questions documented for later validation

□ Component inventory: available, needed, new
□ All colors use semantic tokens (--color-*)
□ All spacing uses space tokens (--space-*)
□ All typography uses type scale (--text-*)
□ Layout structure defined with measurements
□ Responsive behavior for mobile, tablet, desktop
□ Interactive elements have all states defined
□ Keyboard interactions specified
□ Visual hierarchy clear (5 levels)
□ Key design decisions documented with rationale
□ Rationale traces back to user needs

□ WCAG 2.2 AA audit completed (POUR categories)
□ All color contrast ratios verified
□ Keyboard navigation tested for all interactive elements
□ Focus order logical and visible
□ Nielsen's 10 heuristics evaluated
□ All user flows walked through step-by-step
□ Issues categorized: critical, major, minor, enhancement
□ 0 critical issues (must be resolved before continuing)
□ Each issue has specific fix recommendation
□ Design decisions verified against original user needs

□ All critical issues from Phase 5 resolved
□ All major issues from Phase 5 resolved
□ Each resolution verified (not just claimed)
□ Micro-interactions specified for buttons, inputs, transitions
□ Loading states designed (initial, inline, refresh)
□ Empty states designed (first use, no results, error)
□ Error states designed with recovery options
□ Implementation guide complete:
  □ Component structure
  □ Token usage
  □ Data requirements
  □ Accessibility checklist
□ Design QA checklist passed:
  □ Visual consistency
  □ Interaction design
  □ Accessibility
  □ Responsive design
  □ Content/microcopy
□ Ready to ship (proud of the work)

HUMAN REVIEW REQUIRED

Phase: [Current phase]
Attempt: [N of 3]
Failures: 
• [Specific failure 1]
• [Specific failure 2]

Context:
[Relevant artifacts and decisions]

Options:
1. [ ] Provide additional guidance and retry
2. [ ] Override quality gate and proceed (document risk)
3. [ ] Rollback to previous phase
4. [ ] Terminate workflow

Notes for reviewer:
[What the orchestrator tried, why it failed]