Add AI Slop Detection to critique and audit commands

Critical addition: Both commands now check for AI-generated aesthetic tells:
- Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents
- Gradient text, glassmorphism, hero metric layouts
- Monospace typography, sparklines as decoration
- Identical card grids, generic fonts, rounded rectangles

Reports now start with "AI Slop Verdict" - pass/fail on distinctiveness.
This is the most important quality signal for shipping work that doesn't
look like every other AI-generated interface.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

.claude/commands/audit.md

@@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ args:
 
 Run systematic quality checks and generate a comprehensive audit report with prioritized issues and actionable recommendations. Don't fix issues - document them for other commands to address.
 
+**First**: Use the frontend-design skill for design principles and anti-patterns.
+
 ## Diagnostic Scan
 
 Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
@@ -51,12 +53,27 @@ Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
    - **Placeholder as label**: Using placeholder text as the only field label
    - **Generic fonts**: Defaulting to Inter/Roboto/Arial without intentional choice
 
+6. **AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)** - Does this look AI-generated? Check for:
+   - **AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds
+   - **Gradient text**: Especially on metrics or headings—decorative rather than meaningful
+   - **Default dark mode with glowing accents**: "Cool" without requiring design decisions
+   - **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "technical/developer" vibes
+   - **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders used decoratively
+   - **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent—it's a template
+   - **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing
+   - **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated
+   - **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell
+   - **Rounded rectangles with generic shadows**: Safe, forgettable, could be any AI output
+
 **CRITICAL**: This is an audit, not a fix. Document issues thoroughly with clear explanations of impact. Use other commands (normalize, optimize, harden, etc.) to fix issues after audit.
 
 ## Generate Comprehensive Report
 
 Create a detailed audit report with the following structure:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells if yes. Be brutally honest—this is the most important quality signal.
+
 ### Executive Summary
 - Total issues found (count by severity)
 - Most critical issues (top 3-5)

.claude/commands/critique.md

@@ -16,55 +16,76 @@ Conduct a holistic design critique, evaluating whether the interface actually wo
 
 Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
-### 1. Visual Hierarchy
+### 1. AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)
+
+**This is the most important check.** Does this look like every other AI-generated interface from 2024-2025? Watch for these tells:
+
+- **The AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds. These combinations have become a fingerprint for AI-generated work.
+- **Gradient text for "impact"**: Especially on metrics or headings. It's decorative rather than meaningful.
+- **Default dark mode**: AI loves dark themes with glowing accents because it looks "cool" without requiring actual design decisions.
+- **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "this is technical/for developers."
+- **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders—used decoratively rather than purposefully.
+- **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent. It's a template now.
+- **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing.
+- **Cards nested in cards**: The AI's go-to for "organizing" content.
+- **Inter/Roboto/system fonts**: The path of least resistance.
+- **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell.
+- **Rounded rectangles with drop shadows**: Generic, safe, forgettable.
+- **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated.
+
+**Ask yourself**: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this," would they believe you immediately? If yes, that's the problem.
+
+A distinctive interface should make someone ask "how was this made?" not "which AI made this?"
+
+### 2. Visual Hierarchy
 - Does the eye flow to the most important element first?
 - Is there a clear primary action? Can you spot it in 2 seconds?
 - Do size, color, and position communicate importance correctly?
 - Is there visual competition between elements that should have different weights?
 
-### 2. Information Architecture
+### 3. Information Architecture
 - Is the structure intuitive? Would a new user understand the organization?
 - Is related content grouped logically?
 - Are there too many choices at once? (cognitive overload)
 - Is the navigation clear and predictable?
 
-### 3. Emotional Resonance
+### 4. Emotional Resonance
 - What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
 - Does it match the brand personality?
 - Does it feel trustworthy, approachable, premium, playful—whatever it should feel?
 - Would the target user feel "this is for me"?
 
-### 4. Discoverability & Affordance
+### 5. Discoverability & Affordance
 - Are interactive elements obviously interactive?
 - Would a user know what to do without instructions?
 - Are hover/focus states providing useful feedback?
 - Are there hidden features that should be more visible?
 
-### 5. Composition & Balance
+### 6. Composition & Balance
 - Does the layout feel balanced or uncomfortably weighted?
 - Is whitespace used intentionally or just leftover?
 - Is there visual rhythm in spacing and repetition?
 - Does asymmetry feel designed or accidental?
 
-### 6. Typography as Communication
+### 7. Typography as Communication
 - Does the type hierarchy clearly signal what to read first, second, third?
 - Is body text comfortable to read? (line length, spacing, size)
 - Do font choices reinforce the brand/tone?
 - Is there enough contrast between heading levels?
 
-### 7. Color with Purpose
+### 8. Color with Purpose
 - Is color used to communicate, not just decorate?
 - Does the palette feel cohesive?
 - Are accent colors drawing attention to the right things?
 - Does it work for colorblind users? (not just technically—does meaning still come through?)
 
-### 8. States & Edge Cases
+### 9. States & Edge Cases
 - Empty states: Do they guide users toward action, or just say "nothing here"?
 - Loading states: Do they reduce perceived wait time?
 - Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming?
 - Success states: Do they confirm and guide next steps?
 
-### 9. Microcopy & Voice
+### 10. Microcopy & Voice
 - Is the writing clear and concise?
 - Does it sound like a human (the right human for this brand)?
 - Are labels and buttons unambiguous?
@@ -74,6 +95,9 @@ Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
 Structure your feedback as a design director would:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Give a clear verdict: Does this look AI-generated? If yes, list the specific tells you spotted. This is pass/fail—either it's distinctive or it's not. Be brutally honest.
+
 ### Overall Impression
 A brief gut reaction—what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.
 

dist/claude-code-prefixed/.claude/commands/i-audit.md

@@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ args:
 
 Run systematic quality checks and generate a comprehensive audit report with prioritized issues and actionable recommendations. Don't fix issues - document them for other commands to address.
 
+**First**: Use the frontend-design skill for design principles and anti-patterns.
+
 ## Diagnostic Scan
 
 Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
@@ -51,12 +53,27 @@ Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
    - **Placeholder as label**: Using placeholder text as the only field label
    - **Generic fonts**: Defaulting to Inter/Roboto/Arial without intentional choice
 
+6. **AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)** - Does this look AI-generated? Check for:
+   - **AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds
+   - **Gradient text**: Especially on metrics or headings—decorative rather than meaningful
+   - **Default dark mode with glowing accents**: "Cool" without requiring design decisions
+   - **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "technical/developer" vibes
+   - **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders used decoratively
+   - **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent—it's a template
+   - **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing
+   - **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated
+   - **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell
+   - **Rounded rectangles with generic shadows**: Safe, forgettable, could be any AI output
+
 **CRITICAL**: This is an audit, not a fix. Document issues thoroughly with clear explanations of impact. Use other commands (normalize, optimize, harden, etc.) to fix issues after audit.
 
 ## Generate Comprehensive Report
 
 Create a detailed audit report with the following structure:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells if yes. Be brutally honest—this is the most important quality signal.
+
 ### Executive Summary
 - Total issues found (count by severity)
 - Most critical issues (top 3-5)

dist/claude-code-prefixed/.claude/commands/i-critique.md

@@ -16,55 +16,76 @@ Conduct a holistic design critique, evaluating whether the interface actually wo
 
 Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
-### 1. Visual Hierarchy
+### 1. AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)
+
+**This is the most important check.** Does this look like every other AI-generated interface from 2024-2025? Watch for these tells:
+
+- **The AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds. These combinations have become a fingerprint for AI-generated work.
+- **Gradient text for "impact"**: Especially on metrics or headings. It's decorative rather than meaningful.
+- **Default dark mode**: AI loves dark themes with glowing accents because it looks "cool" without requiring actual design decisions.
+- **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "this is technical/for developers."
+- **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders—used decoratively rather than purposefully.
+- **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent. It's a template now.
+- **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing.
+- **Cards nested in cards**: The AI's go-to for "organizing" content.
+- **Inter/Roboto/system fonts**: The path of least resistance.
+- **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell.
+- **Rounded rectangles with drop shadows**: Generic, safe, forgettable.
+- **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated.
+
+**Ask yourself**: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this," would they believe you immediately? If yes, that's the problem.
+
+A distinctive interface should make someone ask "how was this made?" not "which AI made this?"
+
+### 2. Visual Hierarchy
 - Does the eye flow to the most important element first?
 - Is there a clear primary action? Can you spot it in 2 seconds?
 - Do size, color, and position communicate importance correctly?
 - Is there visual competition between elements that should have different weights?
 
-### 2. Information Architecture
+### 3. Information Architecture
 - Is the structure intuitive? Would a new user understand the organization?
 - Is related content grouped logically?
 - Are there too many choices at once? (cognitive overload)
 - Is the navigation clear and predictable?
 
-### 3. Emotional Resonance
+### 4. Emotional Resonance
 - What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
 - Does it match the brand personality?
 - Does it feel trustworthy, approachable, premium, playful—whatever it should feel?
 - Would the target user feel "this is for me"?
 
-### 4. Discoverability & Affordance
+### 5. Discoverability & Affordance
 - Are interactive elements obviously interactive?
 - Would a user know what to do without instructions?
 - Are hover/focus states providing useful feedback?
 - Are there hidden features that should be more visible?
 
-### 5. Composition & Balance
+### 6. Composition & Balance
 - Does the layout feel balanced or uncomfortably weighted?
 - Is whitespace used intentionally or just leftover?
 - Is there visual rhythm in spacing and repetition?
 - Does asymmetry feel designed or accidental?
 
-### 6. Typography as Communication
+### 7. Typography as Communication
 - Does the type hierarchy clearly signal what to read first, second, third?
 - Is body text comfortable to read? (line length, spacing, size)
 - Do font choices reinforce the brand/tone?
 - Is there enough contrast between heading levels?
 
-### 7. Color with Purpose
+### 8. Color with Purpose
 - Is color used to communicate, not just decorate?
 - Does the palette feel cohesive?
 - Are accent colors drawing attention to the right things?
 - Does it work for colorblind users? (not just technically—does meaning still come through?)
 
-### 8. States & Edge Cases
+### 9. States & Edge Cases
 - Empty states: Do they guide users toward action, or just say "nothing here"?
 - Loading states: Do they reduce perceived wait time?
 - Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming?
 - Success states: Do they confirm and guide next steps?
 
-### 9. Microcopy & Voice
+### 10. Microcopy & Voice
 - Is the writing clear and concise?
 - Does it sound like a human (the right human for this brand)?
 - Are labels and buttons unambiguous?
@@ -74,6 +95,9 @@ Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
 Structure your feedback as a design director would:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Give a clear verdict: Does this look AI-generated? If yes, list the specific tells you spotted. This is pass/fail—either it's distinctive or it's not. Be brutally honest.
+
 ### Overall Impression
 A brief gut reaction—what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.
 

dist/claude-code/.claude/commands/audit.md

@@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ args:
 
 Run systematic quality checks and generate a comprehensive audit report with prioritized issues and actionable recommendations. Don't fix issues - document them for other commands to address.
 
+**First**: Use the frontend-design skill for design principles and anti-patterns.
+
 ## Diagnostic Scan
 
 Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
@@ -51,12 +53,27 @@ Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
    - **Placeholder as label**: Using placeholder text as the only field label
    - **Generic fonts**: Defaulting to Inter/Roboto/Arial without intentional choice
 
+6. **AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)** - Does this look AI-generated? Check for:
+   - **AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds
+   - **Gradient text**: Especially on metrics or headings—decorative rather than meaningful
+   - **Default dark mode with glowing accents**: "Cool" without requiring design decisions
+   - **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "technical/developer" vibes
+   - **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders used decoratively
+   - **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent—it's a template
+   - **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing
+   - **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated
+   - **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell
+   - **Rounded rectangles with generic shadows**: Safe, forgettable, could be any AI output
+
 **CRITICAL**: This is an audit, not a fix. Document issues thoroughly with clear explanations of impact. Use other commands (normalize, optimize, harden, etc.) to fix issues after audit.
 
 ## Generate Comprehensive Report
 
 Create a detailed audit report with the following structure:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells if yes. Be brutally honest—this is the most important quality signal.
+
 ### Executive Summary
 - Total issues found (count by severity)
 - Most critical issues (top 3-5)

dist/claude-code/.claude/commands/critique.md

@@ -16,55 +16,76 @@ Conduct a holistic design critique, evaluating whether the interface actually wo
 
 Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
-### 1. Visual Hierarchy
+### 1. AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)
+
+**This is the most important check.** Does this look like every other AI-generated interface from 2024-2025? Watch for these tells:
+
+- **The AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds. These combinations have become a fingerprint for AI-generated work.
+- **Gradient text for "impact"**: Especially on metrics or headings. It's decorative rather than meaningful.
+- **Default dark mode**: AI loves dark themes with glowing accents because it looks "cool" without requiring actual design decisions.
+- **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "this is technical/for developers."
+- **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders—used decoratively rather than purposefully.
+- **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent. It's a template now.
+- **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing.
+- **Cards nested in cards**: The AI's go-to for "organizing" content.
+- **Inter/Roboto/system fonts**: The path of least resistance.
+- **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell.
+- **Rounded rectangles with drop shadows**: Generic, safe, forgettable.
+- **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated.
+
+**Ask yourself**: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this," would they believe you immediately? If yes, that's the problem.
+
+A distinctive interface should make someone ask "how was this made?" not "which AI made this?"
+
+### 2. Visual Hierarchy
 - Does the eye flow to the most important element first?
 - Is there a clear primary action? Can you spot it in 2 seconds?
 - Do size, color, and position communicate importance correctly?
 - Is there visual competition between elements that should have different weights?
 
-### 2. Information Architecture
+### 3. Information Architecture
 - Is the structure intuitive? Would a new user understand the organization?
 - Is related content grouped logically?
 - Are there too many choices at once? (cognitive overload)
 - Is the navigation clear and predictable?
 
-### 3. Emotional Resonance
+### 4. Emotional Resonance
 - What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
 - Does it match the brand personality?
 - Does it feel trustworthy, approachable, premium, playful—whatever it should feel?
 - Would the target user feel "this is for me"?
 
-### 4. Discoverability & Affordance
+### 5. Discoverability & Affordance
 - Are interactive elements obviously interactive?
 - Would a user know what to do without instructions?
 - Are hover/focus states providing useful feedback?
 - Are there hidden features that should be more visible?
 
-### 5. Composition & Balance
+### 6. Composition & Balance
 - Does the layout feel balanced or uncomfortably weighted?
 - Is whitespace used intentionally or just leftover?
 - Is there visual rhythm in spacing and repetition?
 - Does asymmetry feel designed or accidental?
 
-### 6. Typography as Communication
+### 7. Typography as Communication
 - Does the type hierarchy clearly signal what to read first, second, third?
 - Is body text comfortable to read? (line length, spacing, size)
 - Do font choices reinforce the brand/tone?
 - Is there enough contrast between heading levels?
 
-### 7. Color with Purpose
+### 8. Color with Purpose
 - Is color used to communicate, not just decorate?
 - Does the palette feel cohesive?
 - Are accent colors drawing attention to the right things?
 - Does it work for colorblind users? (not just technically—does meaning still come through?)
 
-### 8. States & Edge Cases
+### 9. States & Edge Cases
 - Empty states: Do they guide users toward action, or just say "nothing here"?
 - Loading states: Do they reduce perceived wait time?
 - Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming?
 - Success states: Do they confirm and guide next steps?
 
-### 9. Microcopy & Voice
+### 10. Microcopy & Voice
 - Is the writing clear and concise?
 - Does it sound like a human (the right human for this brand)?
 - Are labels and buttons unambiguous?
@@ -74,6 +95,9 @@ Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
 Structure your feedback as a design director would:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Give a clear verdict: Does this look AI-generated? If yes, list the specific tells you spotted. This is pass/fail—either it's distinctive or it's not. Be brutally honest.
+
 ### Overall Impression
 A brief gut reaction—what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.
 

dist/codex-prefixed/.codex/prompts/i-audit.md

@@ -5,6 +5,8 @@ argument-hint: [AREA=<value>]
 
 Run systematic quality checks and generate a comprehensive audit report with prioritized issues and actionable recommendations. Don't fix issues - document them for other commands to address.
 
+**First**: Use the frontend-design skill for design principles and anti-patterns.
+
 ## Diagnostic Scan
 
 Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
@@ -46,12 +48,27 @@ Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
    - **Placeholder as label**: Using placeholder text as the only field label
    - **Generic fonts**: Defaulting to Inter/Roboto/Arial without intentional choice
 
+6. **AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)** - Does this look AI-generated? Check for:
+   - **AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds
+   - **Gradient text**: Especially on metrics or headings—decorative rather than meaningful
+   - **Default dark mode with glowing accents**: "Cool" without requiring design decisions
+   - **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "technical/developer" vibes
+   - **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders used decoratively
+   - **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent—it's a template
+   - **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing
+   - **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated
+   - **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell
+   - **Rounded rectangles with generic shadows**: Safe, forgettable, could be any AI output
+
 **CRITICAL**: This is an audit, not a fix. Document issues thoroughly with clear explanations of impact. Use other commands (normalize, optimize, harden, etc.) to fix issues after audit.
 
 ## Generate Comprehensive Report
 
 Create a detailed audit report with the following structure:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells if yes. Be brutally honest—this is the most important quality signal.
+
 ### Executive Summary
 - Total issues found (count by severity)
 - Most critical issues (top 3-5)

dist/codex-prefixed/.codex/prompts/i-critique.md

@@ -11,55 +11,76 @@ Conduct a holistic design critique, evaluating whether the interface actually wo
 
 Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
-### 1. Visual Hierarchy
+### 1. AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)
+
+**This is the most important check.** Does this look like every other AI-generated interface from 2024-2025? Watch for these tells:
+
+- **The AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds. These combinations have become a fingerprint for AI-generated work.
+- **Gradient text for "impact"**: Especially on metrics or headings. It's decorative rather than meaningful.
+- **Default dark mode**: AI loves dark themes with glowing accents because it looks "cool" without requiring actual design decisions.
+- **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "this is technical/for developers."
+- **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders—used decoratively rather than purposefully.
+- **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent. It's a template now.
+- **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing.
+- **Cards nested in cards**: The AI's go-to for "organizing" content.
+- **Inter/Roboto/system fonts**: The path of least resistance.
+- **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell.
+- **Rounded rectangles with drop shadows**: Generic, safe, forgettable.
+- **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated.
+
+**Ask yourself**: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this," would they believe you immediately? If yes, that's the problem.
+
+A distinctive interface should make someone ask "how was this made?" not "which AI made this?"
+
+### 2. Visual Hierarchy
 - Does the eye flow to the most important element first?
 - Is there a clear primary action? Can you spot it in 2 seconds?
 - Do size, color, and position communicate importance correctly?
 - Is there visual competition between elements that should have different weights?
 
-### 2. Information Architecture
+### 3. Information Architecture
 - Is the structure intuitive? Would a new user understand the organization?
 - Is related content grouped logically?
 - Are there too many choices at once? (cognitive overload)
 - Is the navigation clear and predictable?
 
-### 3. Emotional Resonance
+### 4. Emotional Resonance
 - What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
 - Does it match the brand personality?
 - Does it feel trustworthy, approachable, premium, playful—whatever it should feel?
 - Would the target user feel "this is for me"?
 
-### 4. Discoverability & Affordance
+### 5. Discoverability & Affordance
 - Are interactive elements obviously interactive?
 - Would a user know what to do without instructions?
 - Are hover/focus states providing useful feedback?
 - Are there hidden features that should be more visible?
 
-### 5. Composition & Balance
+### 6. Composition & Balance
 - Does the layout feel balanced or uncomfortably weighted?
 - Is whitespace used intentionally or just leftover?
 - Is there visual rhythm in spacing and repetition?
 - Does asymmetry feel designed or accidental?
 
-### 6. Typography as Communication
+### 7. Typography as Communication
 - Does the type hierarchy clearly signal what to read first, second, third?
 - Is body text comfortable to read? (line length, spacing, size)
 - Do font choices reinforce the brand/tone?
 - Is there enough contrast between heading levels?
 
-### 7. Color with Purpose
+### 8. Color with Purpose
 - Is color used to communicate, not just decorate?
 - Does the palette feel cohesive?
 - Are accent colors drawing attention to the right things?
 - Does it work for colorblind users? (not just technically—does meaning still come through?)
 
-### 8. States & Edge Cases
+### 9. States & Edge Cases
 - Empty states: Do they guide users toward action, or just say "nothing here"?
 - Loading states: Do they reduce perceived wait time?
 - Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming?
 - Success states: Do they confirm and guide next steps?
 
-### 9. Microcopy & Voice
+### 10. Microcopy & Voice
 - Is the writing clear and concise?
 - Does it sound like a human (the right human for this brand)?
 - Are labels and buttons unambiguous?
@@ -69,6 +90,9 @@ Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
 Structure your feedback as a design director would:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Give a clear verdict: Does this look AI-generated? If yes, list the specific tells you spotted. This is pass/fail—either it's distinctive or it's not. Be brutally honest.
+
 ### Overall Impression
 A brief gut reaction—what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.
 

dist/codex/.codex/prompts/audit.md

@@ -5,6 +5,8 @@ argument-hint: [AREA=<value>]
 
 Run systematic quality checks and generate a comprehensive audit report with prioritized issues and actionable recommendations. Don't fix issues - document them for other commands to address.
 
+**First**: Use the frontend-design skill for design principles and anti-patterns.
+
 ## Diagnostic Scan
 
 Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
@@ -46,12 +48,27 @@ Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
    - **Placeholder as label**: Using placeholder text as the only field label
    - **Generic fonts**: Defaulting to Inter/Roboto/Arial without intentional choice
 
+6. **AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)** - Does this look AI-generated? Check for:
+   - **AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds
+   - **Gradient text**: Especially on metrics or headings—decorative rather than meaningful
+   - **Default dark mode with glowing accents**: "Cool" without requiring design decisions
+   - **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "technical/developer" vibes
+   - **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders used decoratively
+   - **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent—it's a template
+   - **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing
+   - **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated
+   - **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell
+   - **Rounded rectangles with generic shadows**: Safe, forgettable, could be any AI output
+
 **CRITICAL**: This is an audit, not a fix. Document issues thoroughly with clear explanations of impact. Use other commands (normalize, optimize, harden, etc.) to fix issues after audit.
 
 ## Generate Comprehensive Report
 
 Create a detailed audit report with the following structure:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells if yes. Be brutally honest—this is the most important quality signal.
+
 ### Executive Summary
 - Total issues found (count by severity)
 - Most critical issues (top 3-5)

dist/codex/.codex/prompts/critique.md

@@ -11,55 +11,76 @@ Conduct a holistic design critique, evaluating whether the interface actually wo
 
 Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
-### 1. Visual Hierarchy
+### 1. AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)
+
+**This is the most important check.** Does this look like every other AI-generated interface from 2024-2025? Watch for these tells:
+
+- **The AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds. These combinations have become a fingerprint for AI-generated work.
+- **Gradient text for "impact"**: Especially on metrics or headings. It's decorative rather than meaningful.
+- **Default dark mode**: AI loves dark themes with glowing accents because it looks "cool" without requiring actual design decisions.
+- **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "this is technical/for developers."
+- **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders—used decoratively rather than purposefully.
+- **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent. It's a template now.
+- **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing.
+- **Cards nested in cards**: The AI's go-to for "organizing" content.
+- **Inter/Roboto/system fonts**: The path of least resistance.
+- **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell.
+- **Rounded rectangles with drop shadows**: Generic, safe, forgettable.
+- **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated.
+
+**Ask yourself**: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this," would they believe you immediately? If yes, that's the problem.
+
+A distinctive interface should make someone ask "how was this made?" not "which AI made this?"
+
+### 2. Visual Hierarchy
 - Does the eye flow to the most important element first?
 - Is there a clear primary action? Can you spot it in 2 seconds?
 - Do size, color, and position communicate importance correctly?
 - Is there visual competition between elements that should have different weights?
 
-### 2. Information Architecture
+### 3. Information Architecture
 - Is the structure intuitive? Would a new user understand the organization?
 - Is related content grouped logically?
 - Are there too many choices at once? (cognitive overload)
 - Is the navigation clear and predictable?
 
-### 3. Emotional Resonance
+### 4. Emotional Resonance
 - What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
 - Does it match the brand personality?
 - Does it feel trustworthy, approachable, premium, playful—whatever it should feel?
 - Would the target user feel "this is for me"?
 
-### 4. Discoverability & Affordance
+### 5. Discoverability & Affordance
 - Are interactive elements obviously interactive?
 - Would a user know what to do without instructions?
 - Are hover/focus states providing useful feedback?
 - Are there hidden features that should be more visible?
 
-### 5. Composition & Balance
+### 6. Composition & Balance
 - Does the layout feel balanced or uncomfortably weighted?
 - Is whitespace used intentionally or just leftover?
 - Is there visual rhythm in spacing and repetition?
 - Does asymmetry feel designed or accidental?
 
-### 6. Typography as Communication
+### 7. Typography as Communication
 - Does the type hierarchy clearly signal what to read first, second, third?
 - Is body text comfortable to read? (line length, spacing, size)
 - Do font choices reinforce the brand/tone?
 - Is there enough contrast between heading levels?
 
-### 7. Color with Purpose
+### 8. Color with Purpose
 - Is color used to communicate, not just decorate?
 - Does the palette feel cohesive?
 - Are accent colors drawing attention to the right things?
 - Does it work for colorblind users? (not just technically—does meaning still come through?)
 
-### 8. States & Edge Cases
+### 9. States & Edge Cases
 - Empty states: Do they guide users toward action, or just say "nothing here"?
 - Loading states: Do they reduce perceived wait time?
 - Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming?
 - Success states: Do they confirm and guide next steps?
 
-### 9. Microcopy & Voice
+### 10. Microcopy & Voice
 - Is the writing clear and concise?
 - Does it sound like a human (the right human for this brand)?
 - Are labels and buttons unambiguous?
@@ -69,6 +90,9 @@ Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
 Structure your feedback as a design director would:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Give a clear verdict: Does this look AI-generated? If yes, list the specific tells you spotted. This is pass/fail—either it's distinctive or it's not. Be brutally honest.
+
 ### Overall Impression
 A brief gut reaction—what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.
 

dist/cursor-prefixed/.cursor/commands/i-audit.md

@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
 Run systematic quality checks and generate a comprehensive audit report with prioritized issues and actionable recommendations. Don't fix issues - document them for other commands to address.
 
+**First**: Use the frontend-design skill for design principles and anti-patterns.
+
 ## Diagnostic Scan
 
 Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
@@ -41,12 +43,27 @@ Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
    - **Placeholder as label**: Using placeholder text as the only field label
    - **Generic fonts**: Defaulting to Inter/Roboto/Arial without intentional choice
 
+6. **AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)** - Does this look AI-generated? Check for:
+   - **AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds
+   - **Gradient text**: Especially on metrics or headings—decorative rather than meaningful
+   - **Default dark mode with glowing accents**: "Cool" without requiring design decisions
+   - **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "technical/developer" vibes
+   - **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders used decoratively
+   - **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent—it's a template
+   - **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing
+   - **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated
+   - **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell
+   - **Rounded rectangles with generic shadows**: Safe, forgettable, could be any AI output
+
 **CRITICAL**: This is an audit, not a fix. Document issues thoroughly with clear explanations of impact. Use other commands (normalize, optimize, harden, etc.) to fix issues after audit.
 
 ## Generate Comprehensive Report
 
 Create a detailed audit report with the following structure:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells if yes. Be brutally honest—this is the most important quality signal.
+
 ### Executive Summary
 - Total issues found (count by severity)
 - Most critical issues (top 3-5)

dist/cursor-prefixed/.cursor/commands/i-critique.md

@@ -6,55 +6,76 @@ Conduct a holistic design critique, evaluating whether the interface actually wo
 
 Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
-### 1. Visual Hierarchy
+### 1. AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)
+
+**This is the most important check.** Does this look like every other AI-generated interface from 2024-2025? Watch for these tells:
+
+- **The AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds. These combinations have become a fingerprint for AI-generated work.
+- **Gradient text for "impact"**: Especially on metrics or headings. It's decorative rather than meaningful.
+- **Default dark mode**: AI loves dark themes with glowing accents because it looks "cool" without requiring actual design decisions.
+- **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "this is technical/for developers."
+- **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders—used decoratively rather than purposefully.
+- **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent. It's a template now.
+- **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing.
+- **Cards nested in cards**: The AI's go-to for "organizing" content.
+- **Inter/Roboto/system fonts**: The path of least resistance.
+- **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell.
+- **Rounded rectangles with drop shadows**: Generic, safe, forgettable.
+- **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated.
+
+**Ask yourself**: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this," would they believe you immediately? If yes, that's the problem.
+
+A distinctive interface should make someone ask "how was this made?" not "which AI made this?"
+
+### 2. Visual Hierarchy
 - Does the eye flow to the most important element first?
 - Is there a clear primary action? Can you spot it in 2 seconds?
 - Do size, color, and position communicate importance correctly?
 - Is there visual competition between elements that should have different weights?
 
-### 2. Information Architecture
+### 3. Information Architecture
 - Is the structure intuitive? Would a new user understand the organization?
 - Is related content grouped logically?
 - Are there too many choices at once? (cognitive overload)
 - Is the navigation clear and predictable?
 
-### 3. Emotional Resonance
+### 4. Emotional Resonance
 - What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
 - Does it match the brand personality?
 - Does it feel trustworthy, approachable, premium, playful—whatever it should feel?
 - Would the target user feel "this is for me"?
 
-### 4. Discoverability & Affordance
+### 5. Discoverability & Affordance
 - Are interactive elements obviously interactive?
 - Would a user know what to do without instructions?
 - Are hover/focus states providing useful feedback?
 - Are there hidden features that should be more visible?
 
-### 5. Composition & Balance
+### 6. Composition & Balance
 - Does the layout feel balanced or uncomfortably weighted?
 - Is whitespace used intentionally or just leftover?
 - Is there visual rhythm in spacing and repetition?
 - Does asymmetry feel designed or accidental?
 
-### 6. Typography as Communication
+### 7. Typography as Communication
 - Does the type hierarchy clearly signal what to read first, second, third?
 - Is body text comfortable to read? (line length, spacing, size)
 - Do font choices reinforce the brand/tone?
 - Is there enough contrast between heading levels?
 
-### 7. Color with Purpose
+### 8. Color with Purpose
 - Is color used to communicate, not just decorate?
 - Does the palette feel cohesive?
 - Are accent colors drawing attention to the right things?
 - Does it work for colorblind users? (not just technically—does meaning still come through?)
 
-### 8. States & Edge Cases
+### 9. States & Edge Cases
 - Empty states: Do they guide users toward action, or just say "nothing here"?
 - Loading states: Do they reduce perceived wait time?
 - Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming?
 - Success states: Do they confirm and guide next steps?
 
-### 9. Microcopy & Voice
+### 10. Microcopy & Voice
 - Is the writing clear and concise?
 - Does it sound like a human (the right human for this brand)?
 - Are labels and buttons unambiguous?
@@ -64,6 +85,9 @@ Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
 Structure your feedback as a design director would:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Give a clear verdict: Does this look AI-generated? If yes, list the specific tells you spotted. This is pass/fail—either it's distinctive or it's not. Be brutally honest.
+
 ### Overall Impression
 A brief gut reaction—what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.
 

dist/cursor/.cursor/commands/audit.md

@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
 Run systematic quality checks and generate a comprehensive audit report with prioritized issues and actionable recommendations. Don't fix issues - document them for other commands to address.
 
+**First**: Use the frontend-design skill for design principles and anti-patterns.
+
 ## Diagnostic Scan
 
 Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
@@ -41,12 +43,27 @@ Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
    - **Placeholder as label**: Using placeholder text as the only field label
    - **Generic fonts**: Defaulting to Inter/Roboto/Arial without intentional choice
 
+6. **AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)** - Does this look AI-generated? Check for:
+   - **AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds
+   - **Gradient text**: Especially on metrics or headings—decorative rather than meaningful
+   - **Default dark mode with glowing accents**: "Cool" without requiring design decisions
+   - **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "technical/developer" vibes
+   - **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders used decoratively
+   - **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent—it's a template
+   - **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing
+   - **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated
+   - **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell
+   - **Rounded rectangles with generic shadows**: Safe, forgettable, could be any AI output
+
 **CRITICAL**: This is an audit, not a fix. Document issues thoroughly with clear explanations of impact. Use other commands (normalize, optimize, harden, etc.) to fix issues after audit.
 
 ## Generate Comprehensive Report
 
 Create a detailed audit report with the following structure:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells if yes. Be brutally honest—this is the most important quality signal.
+
 ### Executive Summary
 - Total issues found (count by severity)
 - Most critical issues (top 3-5)

dist/cursor/.cursor/commands/critique.md

@@ -6,55 +6,76 @@ Conduct a holistic design critique, evaluating whether the interface actually wo
 
 Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
-### 1. Visual Hierarchy
+### 1. AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)
+
+**This is the most important check.** Does this look like every other AI-generated interface from 2024-2025? Watch for these tells:
+
+- **The AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds. These combinations have become a fingerprint for AI-generated work.
+- **Gradient text for "impact"**: Especially on metrics or headings. It's decorative rather than meaningful.
+- **Default dark mode**: AI loves dark themes with glowing accents because it looks "cool" without requiring actual design decisions.
+- **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "this is technical/for developers."
+- **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders—used decoratively rather than purposefully.
+- **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent. It's a template now.
+- **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing.
+- **Cards nested in cards**: The AI's go-to for "organizing" content.
+- **Inter/Roboto/system fonts**: The path of least resistance.
+- **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell.
+- **Rounded rectangles with drop shadows**: Generic, safe, forgettable.
+- **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated.
+
+**Ask yourself**: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this," would they believe you immediately? If yes, that's the problem.
+
+A distinctive interface should make someone ask "how was this made?" not "which AI made this?"
+
+### 2. Visual Hierarchy
 - Does the eye flow to the most important element first?
 - Is there a clear primary action? Can you spot it in 2 seconds?
 - Do size, color, and position communicate importance correctly?
 - Is there visual competition between elements that should have different weights?
 
-### 2. Information Architecture
+### 3. Information Architecture
 - Is the structure intuitive? Would a new user understand the organization?
 - Is related content grouped logically?
 - Are there too many choices at once? (cognitive overload)
 - Is the navigation clear and predictable?
 
-### 3. Emotional Resonance
+### 4. Emotional Resonance
 - What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
 - Does it match the brand personality?
 - Does it feel trustworthy, approachable, premium, playful—whatever it should feel?
 - Would the target user feel "this is for me"?
 
-### 4. Discoverability & Affordance
+### 5. Discoverability & Affordance
 - Are interactive elements obviously interactive?
 - Would a user know what to do without instructions?
 - Are hover/focus states providing useful feedback?
 - Are there hidden features that should be more visible?
 
-### 5. Composition & Balance
+### 6. Composition & Balance
 - Does the layout feel balanced or uncomfortably weighted?
 - Is whitespace used intentionally or just leftover?
 - Is there visual rhythm in spacing and repetition?
 - Does asymmetry feel designed or accidental?
 
-### 6. Typography as Communication
+### 7. Typography as Communication
 - Does the type hierarchy clearly signal what to read first, second, third?
 - Is body text comfortable to read? (line length, spacing, size)
 - Do font choices reinforce the brand/tone?
 - Is there enough contrast between heading levels?
 
-### 7. Color with Purpose
+### 8. Color with Purpose
 - Is color used to communicate, not just decorate?
 - Does the palette feel cohesive?
 - Are accent colors drawing attention to the right things?
 - Does it work for colorblind users? (not just technically—does meaning still come through?)
 
-### 8. States & Edge Cases
+### 9. States & Edge Cases
 - Empty states: Do they guide users toward action, or just say "nothing here"?
 - Loading states: Do they reduce perceived wait time?
 - Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming?
 - Success states: Do they confirm and guide next steps?
 
-### 9. Microcopy & Voice
+### 10. Microcopy & Voice
 - Is the writing clear and concise?
 - Does it sound like a human (the right human for this brand)?
 - Are labels and buttons unambiguous?
@@ -64,6 +85,9 @@ Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
 Structure your feedback as a design director would:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Give a clear verdict: Does this look AI-generated? If yes, list the specific tells you spotted. This is pass/fail—either it's distinctive or it's not. Be brutally honest.
+
 ### Overall Impression
 A brief gut reaction—what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.
 

dist/gemini-prefixed/.gemini/commands/i-audit.toml

@@ -2,6 +2,8 @@ description = "Perform comprehensive audit of interface quality across accessibi
 prompt = """
 Run systematic quality checks and generate a comprehensive audit report with prioritized issues and actionable recommendations. Don't fix issues - document them for other commands to address.
 
+**First**: Use the frontend-design skill for design principles and anti-patterns.
+
 ## Diagnostic Scan
 
 Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
@@ -43,12 +45,27 @@ Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
    - **Placeholder as label**: Using placeholder text as the only field label
    - **Generic fonts**: Defaulting to Inter/Roboto/Arial without intentional choice
 
+6. **AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)** - Does this look AI-generated? Check for:
+   - **AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds
+   - **Gradient text**: Especially on metrics or headings—decorative rather than meaningful
+   - **Default dark mode with glowing accents**: "Cool" without requiring design decisions
+   - **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "technical/developer" vibes
+   - **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders used decoratively
+   - **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent—it's a template
+   - **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing
+   - **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated
+   - **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell
+   - **Rounded rectangles with generic shadows**: Safe, forgettable, could be any AI output
+
 **CRITICAL**: This is an audit, not a fix. Document issues thoroughly with clear explanations of impact. Use other commands (normalize, optimize, harden, etc.) to fix issues after audit.
 
 ## Generate Comprehensive Report
 
 Create a detailed audit report with the following structure:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells if yes. Be brutally honest—this is the most important quality signal.
+
 ### Executive Summary
 - Total issues found (count by severity)
 - Most critical issues (top 3-5)

dist/gemini-prefixed/.gemini/commands/i-critique.toml

@@ -8,55 +8,76 @@ Conduct a holistic design critique, evaluating whether the interface actually wo
 
 Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
-### 1. Visual Hierarchy
+### 1. AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)
+
+**This is the most important check.** Does this look like every other AI-generated interface from 2024-2025? Watch for these tells:
+
+- **The AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds. These combinations have become a fingerprint for AI-generated work.
+- **Gradient text for "impact"**: Especially on metrics or headings. It's decorative rather than meaningful.
+- **Default dark mode**: AI loves dark themes with glowing accents because it looks "cool" without requiring actual design decisions.
+- **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "this is technical/for developers."
+- **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders—used decoratively rather than purposefully.
+- **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent. It's a template now.
+- **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing.
+- **Cards nested in cards**: The AI's go-to for "organizing" content.
+- **Inter/Roboto/system fonts**: The path of least resistance.
+- **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell.
+- **Rounded rectangles with drop shadows**: Generic, safe, forgettable.
+- **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated.
+
+**Ask yourself**: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this," would they believe you immediately? If yes, that's the problem.
+
+A distinctive interface should make someone ask "how was this made?" not "which AI made this?"
+
+### 2. Visual Hierarchy
 - Does the eye flow to the most important element first?
 - Is there a clear primary action? Can you spot it in 2 seconds?
 - Do size, color, and position communicate importance correctly?
 - Is there visual competition between elements that should have different weights?
 
-### 2. Information Architecture
+### 3. Information Architecture
 - Is the structure intuitive? Would a new user understand the organization?
 - Is related content grouped logically?
 - Are there too many choices at once? (cognitive overload)
 - Is the navigation clear and predictable?
 
-### 3. Emotional Resonance
+### 4. Emotional Resonance
 - What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
 - Does it match the brand personality?
 - Does it feel trustworthy, approachable, premium, playful—whatever it should feel?
 - Would the target user feel "this is for me"?
 
-### 4. Discoverability & Affordance
+### 5. Discoverability & Affordance
 - Are interactive elements obviously interactive?
 - Would a user know what to do without instructions?
 - Are hover/focus states providing useful feedback?
 - Are there hidden features that should be more visible?
 
-### 5. Composition & Balance
+### 6. Composition & Balance
 - Does the layout feel balanced or uncomfortably weighted?
 - Is whitespace used intentionally or just leftover?
 - Is there visual rhythm in spacing and repetition?
 - Does asymmetry feel designed or accidental?
 
-### 6. Typography as Communication
+### 7. Typography as Communication
 - Does the type hierarchy clearly signal what to read first, second, third?
 - Is body text comfortable to read? (line length, spacing, size)
 - Do font choices reinforce the brand/tone?
 - Is there enough contrast between heading levels?
 
-### 7. Color with Purpose
+### 8. Color with Purpose
 - Is color used to communicate, not just decorate?
 - Does the palette feel cohesive?
 - Are accent colors drawing attention to the right things?
 - Does it work for colorblind users? (not just technically—does meaning still come through?)
 
-### 8. States & Edge Cases
+### 9. States & Edge Cases
 - Empty states: Do they guide users toward action, or just say "nothing here"?
 - Loading states: Do they reduce perceived wait time?
 - Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming?
 - Success states: Do they confirm and guide next steps?
 
-### 9. Microcopy & Voice
+### 10. Microcopy & Voice
 - Is the writing clear and concise?
 - Does it sound like a human (the right human for this brand)?
 - Are labels and buttons unambiguous?
@@ -66,6 +87,9 @@ Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
 Structure your feedback as a design director would:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Give a clear verdict: Does this look AI-generated? If yes, list the specific tells you spotted. This is pass/fail—either it's distinctive or it's not. Be brutally honest.
+
 ### Overall Impression
 A brief gut reaction—what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.
 

dist/gemini/.gemini/commands/audit.toml

@@ -2,6 +2,8 @@ description = "Perform comprehensive audit of interface quality across accessibi
 prompt = """
 Run systematic quality checks and generate a comprehensive audit report with prioritized issues and actionable recommendations. Don't fix issues - document them for other commands to address.
 
+**First**: Use the frontend-design skill for design principles and anti-patterns.
+
 ## Diagnostic Scan
 
 Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
@@ -43,12 +45,27 @@ Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
    - **Placeholder as label**: Using placeholder text as the only field label
    - **Generic fonts**: Defaulting to Inter/Roboto/Arial without intentional choice
 
+6. **AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)** - Does this look AI-generated? Check for:
+   - **AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds
+   - **Gradient text**: Especially on metrics or headings—decorative rather than meaningful
+   - **Default dark mode with glowing accents**: "Cool" without requiring design decisions
+   - **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "technical/developer" vibes
+   - **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders used decoratively
+   - **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent—it's a template
+   - **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing
+   - **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated
+   - **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell
+   - **Rounded rectangles with generic shadows**: Safe, forgettable, could be any AI output
+
 **CRITICAL**: This is an audit, not a fix. Document issues thoroughly with clear explanations of impact. Use other commands (normalize, optimize, harden, etc.) to fix issues after audit.
 
 ## Generate Comprehensive Report
 
 Create a detailed audit report with the following structure:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells if yes. Be brutally honest—this is the most important quality signal.
+
 ### Executive Summary
 - Total issues found (count by severity)
 - Most critical issues (top 3-5)

dist/gemini/.gemini/commands/critique.toml

@@ -8,55 +8,76 @@ Conduct a holistic design critique, evaluating whether the interface actually wo
 
 Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
-### 1. Visual Hierarchy
+### 1. AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)
+
+**This is the most important check.** Does this look like every other AI-generated interface from 2024-2025? Watch for these tells:
+
+- **The AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds. These combinations have become a fingerprint for AI-generated work.
+- **Gradient text for "impact"**: Especially on metrics or headings. It's decorative rather than meaningful.
+- **Default dark mode**: AI loves dark themes with glowing accents because it looks "cool" without requiring actual design decisions.
+- **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "this is technical/for developers."
+- **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders—used decoratively rather than purposefully.
+- **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent. It's a template now.
+- **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing.
+- **Cards nested in cards**: The AI's go-to for "organizing" content.
+- **Inter/Roboto/system fonts**: The path of least resistance.
+- **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell.
+- **Rounded rectangles with drop shadows**: Generic, safe, forgettable.
+- **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated.
+
+**Ask yourself**: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this," would they believe you immediately? If yes, that's the problem.
+
+A distinctive interface should make someone ask "how was this made?" not "which AI made this?"
+
+### 2. Visual Hierarchy
 - Does the eye flow to the most important element first?
 - Is there a clear primary action? Can you spot it in 2 seconds?
 - Do size, color, and position communicate importance correctly?
 - Is there visual competition between elements that should have different weights?
 
-### 2. Information Architecture
+### 3. Information Architecture
 - Is the structure intuitive? Would a new user understand the organization?
 - Is related content grouped logically?
 - Are there too many choices at once? (cognitive overload)
 - Is the navigation clear and predictable?
 
-### 3. Emotional Resonance
+### 4. Emotional Resonance
 - What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
 - Does it match the brand personality?
 - Does it feel trustworthy, approachable, premium, playful—whatever it should feel?
 - Would the target user feel "this is for me"?
 
-### 4. Discoverability & Affordance
+### 5. Discoverability & Affordance
 - Are interactive elements obviously interactive?
 - Would a user know what to do without instructions?
 - Are hover/focus states providing useful feedback?
 - Are there hidden features that should be more visible?
 
-### 5. Composition & Balance
+### 6. Composition & Balance
 - Does the layout feel balanced or uncomfortably weighted?
 - Is whitespace used intentionally or just leftover?
 - Is there visual rhythm in spacing and repetition?
 - Does asymmetry feel designed or accidental?
 
-### 6. Typography as Communication
+### 7. Typography as Communication
 - Does the type hierarchy clearly signal what to read first, second, third?
 - Is body text comfortable to read? (line length, spacing, size)
 - Do font choices reinforce the brand/tone?
 - Is there enough contrast between heading levels?
 
-### 7. Color with Purpose
+### 8. Color with Purpose
 - Is color used to communicate, not just decorate?
 - Does the palette feel cohesive?
 - Are accent colors drawing attention to the right things?
 - Does it work for colorblind users? (not just technically—does meaning still come through?)
 
-### 8. States & Edge Cases
+### 9. States & Edge Cases
 - Empty states: Do they guide users toward action, or just say "nothing here"?
 - Loading states: Do they reduce perceived wait time?
 - Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming?
 - Success states: Do they confirm and guide next steps?
 
-### 9. Microcopy & Voice
+### 10. Microcopy & Voice
 - Is the writing clear and concise?
 - Does it sound like a human (the right human for this brand)?
 - Are labels and buttons unambiguous?
@@ -66,6 +87,9 @@ Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
 Structure your feedback as a design director would:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Give a clear verdict: Does this look AI-generated? If yes, list the specific tells you spotted. This is pass/fail—either it's distinctive or it's not. Be brutally honest.
+
 ### Overall Impression
 A brief gut reaction—what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.
 

source/commands/audit.md

@@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ args:
 
 Run systematic quality checks and generate a comprehensive audit report with prioritized issues and actionable recommendations. Don't fix issues - document them for other commands to address.
 
+**First**: Use the frontend-design skill for design principles and anti-patterns.
+
 ## Diagnostic Scan
 
 Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
@@ -51,12 +53,27 @@ Run comprehensive checks across multiple dimensions:
    - **Placeholder as label**: Using placeholder text as the only field label
    - **Generic fonts**: Defaulting to Inter/Roboto/Arial without intentional choice
 
+6. **AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)** - Does this look AI-generated? Check for:
+   - **AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds
+   - **Gradient text**: Especially on metrics or headings—decorative rather than meaningful
+   - **Default dark mode with glowing accents**: "Cool" without requiring design decisions
+   - **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "technical/developer" vibes
+   - **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders used decoratively
+   - **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent—it's a template
+   - **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing
+   - **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated
+   - **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell
+   - **Rounded rectangles with generic shadows**: Safe, forgettable, could be any AI output
+
 **CRITICAL**: This is an audit, not a fix. Document issues thoroughly with clear explanations of impact. Use other commands (normalize, optimize, harden, etc.) to fix issues after audit.
 
 ## Generate Comprehensive Report
 
 Create a detailed audit report with the following structure:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells if yes. Be brutally honest—this is the most important quality signal.
+
 ### Executive Summary
 - Total issues found (count by severity)
 - Most critical issues (top 3-5)

source/commands/critique.md

@@ -16,55 +16,76 @@ Conduct a holistic design critique, evaluating whether the interface actually wo
 
 Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
-### 1. Visual Hierarchy
+### 1. AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)
+
+**This is the most important check.** Does this look like every other AI-generated interface from 2024-2025? Watch for these tells:
+
+- **The AI color palette**: Cyan-on-dark, purple-to-blue gradients, neon accents on dark backgrounds. These combinations have become a fingerprint for AI-generated work.
+- **Gradient text for "impact"**: Especially on metrics or headings. It's decorative rather than meaningful.
+- **Default dark mode**: AI loves dark themes with glowing accents because it looks "cool" without requiring actual design decisions.
+- **Monospace typography**: Lazy shorthand for "this is technical/for developers."
+- **Glassmorphism everywhere**: Blur effects, glass cards, glow borders—used decoratively rather than purposefully.
+- **Hero metric layout**: Big number, small label, supporting stats, gradient accent. It's a template now.
+- **Sparklines as decoration**: Tiny charts that look sophisticated but convey nothing.
+- **Cards nested in cards**: The AI's go-to for "organizing" content.
+- **Inter/Roboto/system fonts**: The path of least resistance.
+- **Purple-to-blue gradients on white**: The #1 "AI marketing site" tell.
+- **Rounded rectangles with drop shadows**: Generic, safe, forgettable.
+- **Identical card grids**: Same-sized cards with icon + heading + text, repeated.
+
+**Ask yourself**: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this," would they believe you immediately? If yes, that's the problem.
+
+A distinctive interface should make someone ask "how was this made?" not "which AI made this?"
+
+### 2. Visual Hierarchy
 - Does the eye flow to the most important element first?
 - Is there a clear primary action? Can you spot it in 2 seconds?
 - Do size, color, and position communicate importance correctly?
 - Is there visual competition between elements that should have different weights?
 
-### 2. Information Architecture
+### 3. Information Architecture
 - Is the structure intuitive? Would a new user understand the organization?
 - Is related content grouped logically?
 - Are there too many choices at once? (cognitive overload)
 - Is the navigation clear and predictable?
 
-### 3. Emotional Resonance
+### 4. Emotional Resonance
 - What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
 - Does it match the brand personality?
 - Does it feel trustworthy, approachable, premium, playful—whatever it should feel?
 - Would the target user feel "this is for me"?
 
-### 4. Discoverability & Affordance
+### 5. Discoverability & Affordance
 - Are interactive elements obviously interactive?
 - Would a user know what to do without instructions?
 - Are hover/focus states providing useful feedback?
 - Are there hidden features that should be more visible?
 
-### 5. Composition & Balance
+### 6. Composition & Balance
 - Does the layout feel balanced or uncomfortably weighted?
 - Is whitespace used intentionally or just leftover?
 - Is there visual rhythm in spacing and repetition?
 - Does asymmetry feel designed or accidental?
 
-### 6. Typography as Communication
+### 7. Typography as Communication
 - Does the type hierarchy clearly signal what to read first, second, third?
 - Is body text comfortable to read? (line length, spacing, size)
 - Do font choices reinforce the brand/tone?
 - Is there enough contrast between heading levels?
 
-### 7. Color with Purpose
+### 8. Color with Purpose
 - Is color used to communicate, not just decorate?
 - Does the palette feel cohesive?
 - Are accent colors drawing attention to the right things?
 - Does it work for colorblind users? (not just technically—does meaning still come through?)
 
-### 8. States & Edge Cases
+### 9. States & Edge Cases
 - Empty states: Do they guide users toward action, or just say "nothing here"?
 - Loading states: Do they reduce perceived wait time?
 - Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming?
 - Success states: Do they confirm and guide next steps?
 
-### 9. Microcopy & Voice
+### 10. Microcopy & Voice
 - Is the writing clear and concise?
 - Does it sound like a human (the right human for this brand)?
 - Are labels and buttons unambiguous?
@@ -74,6 +95,9 @@ Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
 
 Structure your feedback as a design director would:
 
+### AI Slop Verdict
+**Start here.** Give a clear verdict: Does this look AI-generated? If yes, list the specific tells you spotted. This is pass/fail—either it's distinctive or it's not. Be brutally honest.
+
 ### Overall Impression
 A brief gut reaction—what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.