Skill: Fix design notes

Every PR that records evidence screenshots gets an advisory design review. Its notes ride in the Evidence preview check, next to the evidence they are about: one summary line, and the notes as the check's text. They never change the evidence verdict, but a note marked Worth fixing is a defect a careful designer would send back. Fix it, or say in the PR why the screen is right.

Read the notes

sha=$(gh pr view <pr> --json headRefOid --jq .headRefOid)
check() { gh api "repos/{owner}/{repo}/commits/$sha/check-runs?check_name=Evidence%20preview" --jq ".check_runs[0].output.$1"; }
check summary   # ends with "Design review (advisory): 3 notes, 1 worth fixing." or "no notes."
check text      # the notes, then the same notes as JSON

Each note gives:

Field	Use it to
rule	layout.* was measured from the DOM (exact). S2, V2… are DESIGN.md; OW-* are the OpenWork Design rules in evals/design-review/rubric.md (judged from pixels; may vary run to run)
Screenshot	the spec step that took it, and the spec file
Where in the code	grep for the hook ([data-library-row="…"] → data-library-row) or the class list to find the component
Reproduce	the command that re-records the screenshots and reviews them locally

The JSON block at the end of the check text has the same notes for scripts. The screenshots themselves are in the review report the check links to.

Reproduce, fix, verify

1. Run the note's reproduce command. Read --json output, not prose: pnpm evals:e2e <slug> --local && pnpm --dir evals design:review -- --test-run latest --json (judged notes need OPENAI_API_KEY or ANTHROPIC_API_KEY; measured ones do not).
2. Find the component from the hook or class list. Read DESIGN.md and the rule in evals/design-review/rubric.md before changing anything: the fix follows the team's pattern, not the note's wording.
3. Fix it in the product code, never in the spec or the rubric.
4. Re-run the same command. The note must be gone and no new Worth fixing note may appear. Look at the screenshot yourself: a passing rule is not a good screen.
5. Push. CI re-runs the review; the evidence check's summary says Design review (advisory): no notes. or lists only what you decided to keep.

When the screen is right

A judged note can be wrong, and a team decision can outrank a generic rule. Leave the code, and put one line in the PR body under Evidence: Design review: kept OW-LIST-HEADER on the Library; the columns are compared (see DESIGN.md S2). Do not edit the rubric to silence a note in the same PR that triggers it.

Rules

• Measured notes are facts about the layout; do not argue with the numbers.
• Never chase a judged note across runs: if it flips between runs, it is low confidence. Fix what you can see in the screenshot.
• Fix the shared component when the hook points at one (a row used by every list), not each screen.