Making a design system AI-ready

Jan 6, 2025

MTF was exploring AI-assisted design tools for a regulated lending platform – where a generic AI confidently generating a "plausible" screen is genuinely dangerous. I built and shipped a real Claude Skill: 38 playbooks, 49 components, a 15-point review gate with a hallucination check, and a validated pilot proven across five real application types.

Making a design system AI-ready

Jan 6, 2025

MTF was exploring AI-assisted design tools for a regulated lending platform – where a generic AI confidently generating a "plausible" screen is genuinely dangerous. I built and shipped a real Claude Skill: 38 playbooks, 49 components, a 15-point review gate with a hallucination check, and a validated pilot proven across five real application types.

CLIENT

MTF Finance

CLIENT

MTF Finance

Role

Senior Product Designer

Role

Senior Product Designer

Service

Design Systems

Service

Design Systems

MTF Connect
MTF Connect

The Problem

The Problem

Understanding the challenge

MTF was exploring AI-assisted design tools for MTF Connect, a compliance-sensitive lending platform. The risk was specific: a generic AI confidently generating a "plausible" screen is genuinely dangerous in a regulated workflow – it won't know a decision needs an audit trail, or that a status is system-generated rather than a human call. Making the design system AI-ready needed to mean something concrete, not a buzzword.

My role

I designed and built this AI-context package myself – defining the guardrails, the design-thinking framework, and the mandatory review gate – then packaged the whole thing as a real, invocable Claude Skill.

The Approach

The Approach

Before any design rule, the package states what MTF Connect actually is: not a consumer banking app, an operational lending platform. From there, I built a Jobs-to-be-Done framework of 10 real jobs, six working design principles, and explicit "Always / Never" guardrails – backed by a governed component library of 49 components and 198 design tokens sourced directly from the real NUI Figma file, so nothing gets invented on the fly.

The Tradeoff

The Tradeoff

I wrote down an explicit priority order rather than leaving "what matters most" implicit: accuracy over speed, compliance over polish, transparency over automation that hides its reasoning. A mandatory 15-point review gate, including a dedicated hallucination check, slows the process down on purpose – in a regulated lending platform, a screen that's fast but quietly wrong costs far more than one that's slower and correct.

The Solution

The Solution

Packaged as a real Claude Skill that loads context automatically:
– A 15-point Design Review Gate ending on one test: could an Originator immediately understand what's happening and why?
– A coaching layer offering grounded suggestions throughout the process, not just one big review at the end
– A Design Outcomes file closing every project with a named sign-off across Design, Engineering, Product, and Compliance.

The Results

The Results

A validated pilot: an application header component, built entirely from NUI context, proven across all five application types – it had to survive real lending logic, not a demo scenario. That validation moved the system to its next stage: it's now being used to prototype whole new MTF Connect features, starting with Payment Waiver and Hardship.