Product discovery & UX research
User interviews, Jobs-to-be-Done mapping, and usability audits that turn ambiguity into a problem engineering can actually solve.
From research to component-level delivery, we design the moments that decide whether a product is trusted — confidence in AI output, clarity under complexity, and interfaces engineering can build without reinterpreting the spec.
When there's no one dedicated to interaction design, developers make the calls — and the product ships working screens that don't hold up under real use.
Confidence, uncertainty, and failure need a visual language people can read at a glance — not a raw model response dropped into a UI.
The product does what it's supposed to, and people still don't use it. That gap is usually the interface, not the roadmap.
Healthcare, fintech, and other regulated or high-stakes products need interfaces people are willing to act on, not just look at.
Without a shared system, each new feature reinvents its own patterns, and the product drifts further from being consistent.
Mockups stop matching what ships. Closing that gap needs someone who stays through implementation, not just through handoff.
User interviews, Jobs-to-be-Done mapping, and usability audits that turn ambiguity into a problem engineering can actually solve.
Component-level design in Figma, backed by a token-based system your engineers can maintain across web, mobile, and admin surfaces.
Confidence indicators, fallback states, and progressive disclosure for the moments where a model's output meets a person's judgment.
Dashboards, control surfaces, and multi-role tools designed for people making real decisions under real constraints, not demo-day simplicity.
Redlines, implementation notes, and a design QA pass before launch. We stay through the build, not just through the mockups.
Structured testing against real tasks, not opinions, so design changes are backed by what people actually do.
We treat uncertainty, confidence, and failure as design problems, with artifacts that make the reasoning visible before code ships.
Visual language for how sure a model is, so people know when to double-check and when to move on.
What the interface shows when a model can't answer, answers wrong, or times out, designed before it happens in production.
Complex or uncertain output revealed in stages, so people aren't asked to trust a black box all at once.
Interfaces for the moments a person needs to approve, correct, or override an AI decision, with the review step designed in, not bolted on.
We review what exists — product, users, and constraints — before proposing a single screen.
Research-backed design in Figma, reviewed against engineering feasibility as we go, not after.
Design and engineering run together through implementation, with a QA pass before launch.
Once it ships, the design system and rationale are yours to extend, with no dependency on us to change a screen.
A mix of design systems and concept explorations, labeled clearly as what they are.
Yes. Design-only engagements are common, especially for teams with in-house engineering. We hand off Figma files, a design system, and implementation notes.
Discovery and design usually run three to six weeks depending on scope, then continue alongside implementation if we're building together.
Yes. We audit what exists first and extend it where it holds up, rather than replacing working patterns for the sake of a fresh look.
Component-level Figma files, a token-based design system, redlines, and implementation notes your engineers can work from directly.
Design holds up best when it runs alongside engineering, not ahead of it. Book a call and we'll scope both together.