slop-cop

A visual-design referee. Given one or more image assets plus a decision context, produce strict per-asset verdicts (SHIP, FIX, or KILL) and, when multiple candidates compete for one slot, a ranked recommendation with placement reasoning.

The goal: stop hallucinated text, melted hands, off-brand vibes, and obvious AI artifacts from reaching production.

When to invoke

• User has 1–N images and a decision to make ("which works best for hero?", "is this safe to ship?", "does this fit my brand?").
• User wants a second opinion on a visual choice before deploy.
• User asks to audit a landing page or compare AI-generated variants.
• User explicitly says "slop check" / "is this AI slop?"

Inputs the skill needs

Before analysis, confirm or infer:

1. Image paths — 1 or more local file paths or URLs.
2. Decision context — what slot/role is this for? Examples: "hero banner at 1200x600", "square avatar 1024x1024", "mobile card at 4:5", "is this safe to ship anywhere?".
3. Target render size / aspect ratio — if relevant (e.g. hero rendered at 600x600 with rounded corners and a 4px border).
4. Brand palette / style — hex colors and a one-line style descriptor when available (e.g. "navy #0f3a66 / orange #f3812a, cartoon illustration").
5. Mode — single-asset audit (SHIP/FIX/KILL) or comparative pick (rank + recommend one).

If the user does not provide brand context, ask once. If they decline, proceed without brand-fit scoring and note it in the verdict.

Workflow

1. Run the vision pass

For each image, call the OpenClaw image tool with the strict checklist prompt in references/vision-prompt-template.md. Pass one image per call when possible — keeps the model focused. Use images (multi) only for explicit side-by-side comparison once each has been individually vetted.

The prompt template forces the vision model to enumerate findings against a fixed checklist instead of writing vibes-based prose.

2. Score against the full checklist

The mandatory checklist lives in references/checklist.md. Every asset must be scored on:

• Hallucination scan — gibberish text, extra/melted fingers, broken anatomy, duplicated objects, watermarks, AI signatures, lighting that contradicts itself.
• Legibility at target size — can any text on the asset be read at its actual render size?
• Responsive safety — will the focal subject survive cropping to 16:9, 4:5, 1:1, and 9:16? Identify the focal point in pixel/percent terms.
• Cross-browser / format — transparency needs (PNG/WEBP vs JPG), color profile concerns (sRGB vs P3), iOS Safari quirks.
• Brand fit — if palette/style provided, check coherence; flag major mismatches.
• Format / size sanity — actual dimensions, file size for web, aspect-ratio fit for the target slot.

3. Assign a verdict per asset

Use exactly one verdict word per asset, plus a one-sentence reason. No hedging, no "looks okay but...".

Hard kill triggers (any one of these = automatic KILL):

• Visible hallucinated/gibberish text on a graphic shipping to prod.
• Extra/missing/melted fingers on a human or human-adjacent character.
• Visible watermark or AI-tool signature.
• Major brand-palette violation (when palette provided) that can't be fixed by recolor.

See references/anti-patterns.md for the full kill list and CSS-level gotchas that come up on real sites.

4. Comparative mode (multiple candidates, one slot)

When the user is choosing between assets for a single slot:

1. Verdict each candidate individually first.
2. Drop all KILL verdicts from the running.
3. Rank remaining SHIP and FIX candidates by fit-to-context (brand match > focal-point survival > legibility > polish).
4. Recommend one. Name the file path, the slot, and one-sentence placement reasoning.
5. If every candidate is KILL or FIX, recommend regeneration with a brief brief.

5. Output format

Return a structured response:

## Verdicts
- \x3Cfilename> — VERDICT — one-sentence reason
- \x3Cfilename> — VERDICT — one-sentence reason
...

## Anti-patterns flagged
- (optional) bullet list of CSS/HTML/format gotchas detected from context

## Recommendation
\x3CFor comparative mode: which file goes in which slot, why, and any FIX steps needed before deploy.>

## Deploy notes
\x3CConcrete file paths, target dimensions, format conversions, and any CSS/HTML lines that should change. Do NOT execute deploys — describe them.>

Keep it tight. No filler, no "great question."

Failure modes

• Vision tool unavailable / errors out — Document the failure, then make a best-effort judgment from filename, file metadata (identify / file / exiftool if available), and decision context. Mark the verdict as BEST-EFFORT in parens and flag that a manual eyeball is required before ship.
• No brand context provided — Proceed; note "no brand check performed."
• Asset is a wordmark/logo — Skip hallucination scan for stylized typography (intentional design ≠ gibberish), but still check legibility, format, and brand-palette match.

References

• references/vision-prompt-template.md — exact prompt to send to the vision tool.
• references/checklist.md — the full per-asset checklist.
• references/anti-patterns.md — concrete bugs and CSS/HTML pitfalls to flag.
• references/promo-copy.md — optional marketing copy for this skill (not loaded during normal use).