Vocabulary is just the surface. Beneath it is an understanding of how to achieve your goals with design. How to make things that are easy to use, accessible, that create a certain impression.
Does this website (presumably made with the help of these AI tools) show this kind of understanding of design? Not really. It's chaotic, the text is often hard to read and there is a ton of fluff, both in terms of visuals and copy.
There is a "Frequently Asked Questions" section and a "Popular" $100 tier in the "Support the Project" section, even though this project seems to be brand new. Why lie to the reader?
Roundabout what I would expect as a result from the prompt "make a website that demonstrates how LLMs can better designs"
Yes, but with LLMs, sometimes simply mentioning the right words is enough to prime the model in the direction you want to take it. If you start a prompt talking about leading and type pairings, it will take greater care with typography. You don't need to be an expert typographer to take advantage of this phenomenon.
I agree. I tried figuring it out for 1-2 minutes, and then closed the tab.
I toned down some of the language on the landing page, as it had sometimes too much snake-oil-salesman-energy, should not oversell. I've also toned down fluff, fixed some typography issues. I rushed the landing page and example case studies to get this shipped, whereas the actual skill and commands my colleagues and I have been using effectively on real projects (that I can't screenshot yet), and the open sourcing is a side product. Lesson learned!
I also hear you on the "Popular" $100 tier. That was a side effect of Claude Code trying to make this too "SaaS-y", and I admittedly didn't love it and shouldn't have shipped that language. While it might work for SaaS, this project isn't intended to be SaaS, and just open source for the community in the hopes that it helps somebody the way it helped me, so I toned it down significantly.
So there's the possibility of skipping the intermediate work in between by exposing yourself to just the input and the output of the process for certain domains, this is for frontend I think.
If you’re not familiar with what a /command is in the context of LLM, this may just not be for you and that's fine, but the purpose is clearly stated.
Renaissance Geek (noun)
A person who moves fluidly between art, technology, narrative, and systems — guided by curiosity instead of specialization.
With AI as their amplifier, this breadth makes them dangerous enough to build the future rather than be shaped by it.
The mix of sans and serif fonts on their website is a mess. There's too much negative space, and it's inconsistent. Too many font sizes, and some that are so tiny they're illegible.
In the landing page before/after example, I think the "before" design looks more appealing.
Of user interface style: low contrast and hence poor readability, with excessive white space.
It's interesting to see people creating and 'selling' agent skills. This one asks for donations, but I was expecting to see a stripe link and 'download for 4 dollars, yours forever' (personally I think that would convert better...)
I wonder if there will be full-blown skill marketplaces soon. Would that be a way for some experts to recoup some (presumably very small portion) of the income they might lose due to generative AI market effects?
That landing page example is devastatingly bad. You start with a page that has usage numbers, uptime, support 24/7 and a customer rating above the fold. You end up with a page that lacks all of these advantage and instead looks bland and has horrible typography and even less text contrast.
In line with that, the Dashboard looks more organized in the "after" picture, but that's because it lost most of its useful information.
If you want to look at the bright side, this design guide will be easier to spot SAAS, slop as a service.
This is something I hate: gray text. Designers love it but it is often very illegible because of inadequate contrast.
drcongo•3w ago
Torwald•3w ago
I think the difficulty for AI to learn this, in general, is the missing out of the day-to-day experience living as a human, because that is what shapes our viewing habits. And those are what a good graphic design interacts with.
dickiedyce•3w ago
And if they need to explain it... ;-)
Tufte it isn't.
lelandfe•3w ago
The dashboard might even be funnier, though.
And this is what the creator chose to demo.
drcongo•3w ago
b450•3w ago
The "after" designs all replace the rather generic "SV startup with a tailwind UI" with this serif font, parchment color look. It looks very similar to Anthropic's branding. I guess it looks marginally more distinctive? Though it seems to replace one knock-off visual identity for another. But the claim is that the tool here is implementing best practices through a sophisticated "design vocabulary", and in that sense the examples strike me as manifest failures. I find the general legibility of the "before" designs to be much better.
paulbakaus•3w ago