Generated assets move into review without carrying the evidence reviewers need.
Rich provenance supports accountable approval while a narrow first version protects a fast, understandable pilot.
Who you’d be doing this for
“Someone dropped a polished image in the file, and nobody could tell me what inputs produced it.”
Raluca Todorovic · Staff Product Designer
Reviews generated visual assets before they enter a shared interface library.
What is at stake
Reviewers are reconstructing prompts and inputs from screenshots and approval threads. You need to weigh a useful evidence trail against a first version that stays focused enough to test.
Why it isn’t already fixed
Every obvious fix costs something else. That’s the part you’d have to decide.
- review accountability vs creative flow
- metadata richness vs reliable scope
- canvas-native review vs external-agent flexibility
- enterprise needs vs first-version focus
Why Figma
Figma Weave workflows connect generated assets to Figma canvas work, where reviewers need to understand what produced an asset before approving reuse.
Written with these in mind
Not your kind of problem? 45 more at Figma, or browse every organization.
This is the setup. The work is inside.
Running it puts you in the room: the full situation and its constraints, stakeholders who push back in their own words, and the decisions that are yours to make. What you produce becomes a Day One Plan — work you can show someone instead of describing.