{{command_prefix}}list-assumptions
Role: Surface implicit design assumptions that were never explicitly decided. Output a numbered list tagging each as [EXPLICIT] (found in STATE.md/DESIGN-CONTEXT.md decisions) or [IMPLICIT] (inferred from code patterns).
Step 1 - Read explicit decisions
Read .design/STATE.md <decisions> and .design/DESIGN-CONTEXT.md (if present). Collect every D-XX as [EXPLICIT] entries keyed by category.
Step 2 - Scan codebase for implicit patterns
If --area <name> is given, restrict to that area. Otherwise scan all.
Layout
- Grep for
@mediaqueries → "Is mobile-first or desktop-first assumed?" - Grep for
grid-template,flex-direction→ "Is F-pattern or Z-pattern layout assumed?"
Typography
- Grep for
font-familydeclarations → "Does the chosen font stack assume brand acceptance?" - Grep for
font-size: [0-9]+pxwith varying values → "Is a modular scale assumed or ad-hoc sizing?"
Color
- Grep for hex literals
#[0-9a-fA-F]{3,8}→ "Is the palette assumed to be fixed without a token layer?"
Motion
- Grep for
@keyframes,transition,animate→ "Does the brand tolerate animation?" - Grep for
prefers-reduced-motion→ "Is reduced-motion honored or assumed ignored?"
A11y
- Grep for
aria-,role=,alt=coverage → "Is WCAG AA the target, or AAA?" - Grep for
outline: none,outline: 0→ "Are focus rings intentionally removed?"
For each hit, emit Detected assumption: [pattern] at [file:line] and flag as [IMPLICIT].
Step 3 - Output
━━━ Design assumptions ━━━ Typography 01 [EXPLICIT] D-03: Font family Inter 02 [IMPLICIT] 18 px font-size values found — scale not explicit (src/Card.css:12, ...) Color 03 [IMPLICIT] 47 hex literals — no token layer (see {{command_prefix}}discuss color) ... N assumptions total — M implicit. Next: {{command_prefix}}discuss --all to resolve implicit ones. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
