Checklist: Wireframe Review

Purpose

To validate the quality, structure, and completeness of wireframes before they are finalized. Prevents missed states, inconsistent spacing, or unclear flows.


Wireframe Review Checklist

ItemCheckStatus (☑/✗)Notes
Structure & LayoutScreen follows Wireframe Structuring Model (Hero, CTA, Info, Action, Feedback)  
Grid AlignmentElements respect Grid & Spacing Rulesheet  
ConsistencyReusable blocks/cards match across screens  
State VariantsEmpty, Loading, Success, Error, Permission states are included  
AnnotationsNotes for interactions, transitions, and edge cases documented  
ClarityNo ambiguous labels (“Something here”) or lorem ipsum  
NavigationEntry & exit points align with UX Flow Diagram  
AccessibilityMinimum tap/click sizes and text sizes respected  
ResponsivenessDesktop + mobile variants drafted; tablet considered  
Business AlignmentWireframe supports defined goals/success criteria  
Review CyclePeer feedback incorporated  
Final ApprovalDesign Lead reviewed & approved  

Usage Notes

  • This checklist must be completed before wireframes are marked “Approved.”
  • Designer → self-check → peer-review → lead approval.
  • Store the completed checklist alongside the wireframe set in the project folder.

Framework: Grid & Spacing Rulesheet

Purpose

To standardize grids, spacing, and breakpoints so wireframes stay consistent, developer-ready, and scalable across devices (web, mobile, dashboard).


Grid System

Screen TypeGrid ColumnsGutter WidthContainer WidthNotes
Desktop (≥1440px)1224px1140pxLeave outer 150px margins for whitespace
Tablet (≥768px)820px720pxMaintain 16–20px padding on edges
Mobile (≤375px)416pxFluid (100%)Avoid >2 columns; stack content

Spacing Rules

Element TypeSpacing StandardNotes
Page Margin80px top/bottomFor desktop; reduce to 40px mobile
Section Gap64px between sectionsAlign with vertical rhythm
Component Gap24px between componentsUse multiples of 8px grid
Inside Cards/Blocks16px paddingMobile: min 12px
Button Padding12px vertical, 24px horizontalMaintain accessible tap sizes
Form Field Spacing16px between fieldsInline errors reduce to 8px

Breakpoint & Responsiveness

  • Breakpoints: Desktop ≥1440px, Laptop ≥1024px, Tablet ≥768px, Mobile ≤375px.
  • Always design desktop + mobile first wireframes, then adjust tablet.
  • Content must reflow, not shrink → e.g., 3 cards (desktop) → 2 (tablet) → 1 (mobile).

Alignment Principles

  • Align to grid columns, not arbitrary pixels.
  • Use 8px base unit for all spacing increments.
  • Center-align CTA zones when possible; left-align text blocks for readability.
  • Never mix different alignment patterns in same screen.

Usage Notes

  • Apply this framework in all wireframe drafts (Doc 3.1).
  • Designers should annotate deviations (if any).
  • Devs must implement CSS grids consistent with this model.
  • QA team validates with Spacing & Layout QA Checklist (EPIC 6).

Template: Wireflow Mapping Sheet

Purpose

To merge flow diagrams (user actions, decisions) with wireframe layouts (screen structure), ensuring clarity for both design and dev teams.


Table – Wireflow Mapping

Flow Step IDUser Action / DecisionWireframe IDScreen Thumbnail (insert in Figma/Doc)System ResponseNotes / Variants
F1Click “Book Demo”WF1[Wireframe – Landing Hero]Load booking formShow loading state
F2Fill form fieldsWF2[Wireframe – Booking Form]Validate inputInline validation required
F3Submit formWF2[Wireframe – Booking Form: Submit Variant]Trigger backend APIHandle timeout/error
F4Slot availableWF3[Wireframe – Confirmation Screen]Send email + calendar inviteSuccess message
F5Slot unavailableWF2[Wireframe – Error State]Show alternate slotsRetry path

Usage Notes

  • Always pair flow IDs (F1, F2…) with Wireframe IDs (WF1, WF2…) → avoids mismatch.
  • Keep thumbnails small in document but link to full wireframe in Figma.
  • Add variants inline (empty/loading/error) instead of making separate rows unless complex.
  • This sheet is especially useful during handoff walkthroughs → devs see both logic + layout.

Template: Wireframe Specification

Purpose

Wireframes sit at the intersection of design research and product intent. They are not meant to dictate pixel perfection or system behavior, but rather to communicate how content, navigation, and interaction models should be organized before moving into high-fidelity UI design. A Wireframe Specification is essentially the narrative that ensures a wireframe is understood in the right context: what type of product it belongs to (website, web app, or mobile app), what constraints shape its structure, and how it maps to user journeys. Unlike a functional specification, which dives into validations, database updates, or error handling, a wireframe specification focuses on information architecture (IA), layout hierarchy, and interaction expectations at a sketch level. This distinction is critical because if wireframes become bloated with technical detail, they lose their agility and fail to serve their role as an exploratory and communicative artifact.

A good wireframe specification ensures clarity across three fronts. First, it documents scope and platform: websites have responsive breakpoints and content-driven layouts, web apps revolve around task completion and dashboard logic, and mobile apps must optimize for small-screen navigation and gestures. Second, it captures IA decisions: what appears above the fold, what is persistent navigation, and how calls-to-action are sequenced. Third, it provides annotations that explain intent: why a section is included, what research insight backs its placement, and how the state should behave in principle without diving into database or API details. When maintained across all major wireframes, this specification becomes a lightweight yet powerful companion to the visuals, making them self-explanatory even without the designer present.

Finally, the value of such a specification is in alignment and reuse. Product managers can validate that user needs are being met without misinterpreting layouts. Developers can anticipate technical implications without mistaking wireframes for final UI. Designers can evolve from sketches to prototypes in a structured way while carrying forward the rationale behind each decision. Most importantly, wireframe specifications prevent the all-too-common pitfall where stakeholders look at a wireframe and either dismiss it as “unfinished art” or assume it is “final design.” By making the invisible decisions visible — through structured rows and annotations — the specification transforms raw sketches into durable design documentation, supporting iterative, collaborative, and research-anchored design practice.


Table – Wireframe Specification Template

Table A – Website Wireframes (10 rows)

Screen IDScreen NamePurposeKey Layout SectionsNavigation ModelContent Priority NotesCTA PlacementResponsive ConsiderationsAnnotation NotesResearch Insight
W1Homepage – HeroIntroduce value propHero, Nav, CTA, InfoTop nav + footerHero headline first, supporting info belowPrimary CTA in heroEnsure hero scales to mobile foldHero text limited to 8–12 wordsEye-tracking showed first 3s critical
W2Homepage – FeaturesShowcase offeringsInfo grid, icons, CTAScroll from hero3 features max per rowCTA after each feature groupCollapse grid into stacked listIcons must be distinct, no stockUsers skim feature blocks quickly
W3Homepage – TestimonialsBuild trustQuote cards, author infoInline scrollShow at least 2 per foldCTA after testimonialsCard height flexibleInclude real names/photosSocial proof improves conversions
W4About PageTell storyHero, timeline, teamGlobal navMission first, then teamCTA: “Join us”Stack timeline verticallyAnnotate image ratiosResearch shows story builds trust
W5Contact PageCapture leadsForm, map, infoFooter nav linkForm above mapCTA “Submit”Mobile form uses native inputInline validation placeholdersUsers abandon long forms
W6Blog ListingContent hubGrid/list of postsGlobal nav + categoryNewest firstCTA: “Read more”2-column collapses to 1Use content tagsBlogs support SEO visibility
W7Blog DetailArticle viewHero image, text, sidebarScrollTitle and author above foldCTA: “Subscribe” inlineSidebar moves below textAnnotate font sizesLongform engagement metric
W8Pricing PageConvert interestPlan cards, feature tableGlobal navMost popular plan highlightedCTA: “Start Free Trial”Stack cards in mobile viewHighlight plan differencesAnchoring effect influences choices
W9Careers PageRecruit talentListings, culture, CTAFooter + searchJob list first, then cultureCTA: “Apply” on eachMobile filter collapsibleRole titles standardisedResearch shows culture drives apply
W10Error 404Recovery pathMessage, search, linksGlobal navClear explanationCTA: “Back to Home”Keep concise for mobileProvide humor or brand toneUsers bounce if no clear recovery

Table B – Web App Wireframes (10 rows)

Screen IDScreen NamePurposeLayout StructureTask Flow ContextData DisplayCTA PlacementEmpty State NotesAnnotation NotesResearch Insight
WA1LoginAuthenticate usersForm, branding, CTAEntry pointEmail + password fields“Login” button centeredShow benefits in empty stateProvide password reset linkReduce friction to login
WA2Dashboard – OverviewGive snapshotHeader, sidebar, widgetsDefault landingKey metrics visible“Add Project” buttonEmpty state shows onboardingIndicate widget placeholdersOverview drives daily return
WA3Dashboard – DetailDeep dive metricsTabs, charts, tablesFrom overviewInteractive chartsCTA: “Export”Show skeleton loadersClarify chart legendsResearch: data needs clarity
WA4Project ListManage projectsTable/grid, filtersFrom navProject names, owners“Create Project” CTAEmpty state suggests setupInline filter guidanceSorting is key for usability
WA5Project DetailManage single projectTabs, info, actionsFrom listProject timeline, tasks“Edit Project” CTABlank project hints next stepsHighlight editable fieldsPMs need task clarity
WA6Task BoardTrack tasksKanban columnsFrom project detailTask cards“Add Task” CTA in each columnEmpty column shows hint textHover shows drag handlesKanban intuitive for users
WA7Task DetailEdit taskModal or detail paneFrom boardTask fields, comments“Save Task” CTAEmpty state encourages notesClarify comment threadingTask detail supports accountability
WA8SettingsAdjust preferencesSidebar, formsGlobal navPreferences and toggles“Save Settings” CTANo empty state neededShow default valuesSettings must be clear
WA9ReportsGenerate insightsCharts, filters, tableFrom dashboardAggregated data“Download Report” CTAEmpty state promotes setupClarify date rangesUsers export reports often
WA10NotificationsAlert usersList viewGlobal navNotification textLinks to relevant screensEmpty state: “No new alerts”Distinguish read/unreadTimely alerts improve adoption

Table C – Mobile App Wireframes (10 rows)

Screen IDScreen NamePurposeLayout PatternNavigationInteraction NotesCTA PlacementGesture ConsiderationsAnnotation NotesResearch Insight
M1Splash ScreenBrand introLogo, loadingN/ABrief animationNoneSwipe ignoredDuration <3sShort splash builds brand recall
M2Onboarding IntroEducate usersSlides, icons, textSwipeableExplain features“Next”Swipe left/rightProgress dots requiredOnboarding reduces churn
M3Onboarding FinalPrompt signupCTA prominentSwipeableSign up/loginCTA: “Get Started”Swipe optionalShow skip optionEarly conversion important
M4Home ScreenDefault viewBottom nav, cardsTabbedDisplay top infoCTA inline on cardsTap gesturesAnnotate card behaviorUsers check home daily
M5Search ScreenAllow discoveryInput, results listGlobal searchUser typesCTA: “Search”Swipe down to dismissAnnotate debounceFast search needed
M6Detail ScreenShow contentHeader, image, textFrom searchScrollableCTA: “Save” or “Share”Swipe back to returnSupport pinch zoomResearch shows content focus
M7Profile ScreenManage user dataTabs: info, settingsTab navEdit infoCTA: “Edit Profile”Swipe to scrollClarify form fieldsProfiles need clarity
M8SettingsAdjust appList of togglesTab navAdjust prefs“Save” at topSwipe down dismissGroup related togglesMobile settings must be simple
M9NotificationsShow alertsList viewGlobalTap opens detailInline CTAs per itemSwipe to clearIndicate read stateMobile users check alerts fast
M10Empty StateHandle no dataIllustration, textContextualShow guidanceCTA: “Add”Swipe ignoredAdd friendly toneEmpty states aid learning

Closing Note

This Wireframe Specification Template is intended as a starter framework rather than a fixed standard. Every product type — whether a website, a web application, or a mobile app — comes with its own unique constraints shaped by information architecture, platform guidelines, and user research insights. Wireframes should always be adapted to reflect the specific journeys, contexts, and priorities uncovered during your design process. As such, this document is meant to provide structure, consistency, and a common language across teams, while leaving room for evolution. Depending on your IA decisions, usability testing outcomes, or product requirements, the rows, annotations, and focus areas can and should be updated. The strength of this template lies not in rigidity but in its adaptability — enabling teams to create wireframes that are not only clear and communicative, but also truly representative of their product vision and user needs.


Framework: Wireframe Structuring Model

Purpose

To provide a modular layout model for wireframes that balances hierarchy, readability, and clarity across web, app, and dashboard designs.


Core Layout Modules

ModuleDefinitionBest PracticesExample Use
Hero ZoneThe entry/top section of a screen or page– Keep simple and impactful – 1 key message + primary action – Avoid clutterLanding page hero with value prop + CTA
CTA ZonePrimary/secondary action areas– Always visible above the fold – Limit to 1–2 CTAs per zone – Ensure visual contrast“Book Demo” button in SaaS homepage
Info Block(s)Supporting content areas explaining value– Use modular cards/blocks – 3–5 key points max – Icons or visuals for quick scanningFeatures overview section
Action ZoneTask or workflow-specific interaction– Place near related content – Keep consistent patterns (forms, buttons) – Ensure accessible tap/click sizes“Create New Project” form in dashboard
Navigation ZonePersistent menu/breadcrumbs for movement– Limit top-level items <7 – Use breadcrumb for depth >2 – Maintain consistent placementLeft sidebar in dashboard
Feedback ZoneStates and user feedback messaging– Show errors inline near field – Success confirmations at top/center – Use microcopy, not just colorsForm errors, success messages

Structural Guidelines

  1. Hierarchy First
    • Always map: Hero → Info → CTA → Action → Feedback.
    • Users should see what matters within 5 seconds.
  2. Grid Alignment
    • Use Grid & Spacing Rulesheet (Doc 3.5) to define breakpoints and container widths.
  3. Scannability
    • Break text-heavy sections into cards/lists.
    • Place CTAs where decisions are natural (after context).
  4. Consistency
    • Repeatable modules across screens reduce cognitive load.
    • Example: same “card style” for product vs. pricing vs. dashboard modules.
  5. Edge Cases
    • Each module must account for empty, loading, success, error states.

Example (Simplified Wireframe Flow for SaaS Landing Page)

  • Hero Zone → Headline: “Cut PRD time by 40%” + CTA: “Book Demo”
  • Info Blocks → 3 cards: Speed, Accuracy, Collaboration
  • CTA Zone → Mid-page “See Pricing” button
  • Action Zone → Demo booking form at bottom
  • Feedback Zone → “Thanks! Check your email for confirmation.”

Usage Notes

  • Apply this model at wireframe drafting stage (Doc 3.1 SOP).
  • Adapt blocks per platform (mobile = stacked, web = horizontal).
  • If a screen/module doesn’t fit model, justify exception in notes.

Outcome: Wireframes become modular, consistent, and scalable, making UI design faster and reducing review cycles.

SOP: Converting UX Flow into Wireframe Drafts

1. Purpose

To provide a repeatable process for translating validated UX flows into structured wireframe drafts that are layout-ready, responsive-aware, and developer-aligned.


2. Scope

  • Applies to all new screens, features, and redesigns.
  • Used by designers and design leads before moving to high-fidelity UI.

3. Definitions

  • Wireframe Draft → A low/medium fidelity layout focusing on structure, not visuals.
  • Wireflow → Wireframe + UX flow combined to show interactions.
  • State Variants → Empty, Loading, Success, Error versions of a wireframe.

4. Step-by-Step Process

Stage A – Preparation

  1. Review Inputs
    • Approved UX Flow Diagram (EPIC 2.4).
    • Interaction-State Coverage Model (EPIC 2.6).
    • Navigation Depth Model (EPIC 2.7).
  2. Define Screen Scope
    • Which screens, states, and variants need wireframes.
    • Assign IDs consistent with flows (e.g., WF1, WF2).

Stage B – Drafting Wireframes

  1. Layout Structure
    • Apply Wireframe Structuring Model (Doc 3.2).
    • Break into modular zones: Hero, CTA, Info Blocks, Actions.
    • Define spacing using Grid & Spacing Rulesheet (Doc 3.5).
  2. Content Mapping
    • Place placeholder text/images (no lorem ipsum).
    • Ensure alignment with Design Goals & Success Criteria (EPIC 1.7).
  3. State Variants
    • Create at least: Empty, Loading, Success, Error.
    • For data-driven screens, add Permission/Edge cases.
  4. Annotations
    • Add notes for interactions, data sources, and transitions.
    • Use consistent annotation style (side notes, sticky labels).

Stage C – Validation & Review

  1. Internal Review
    • Run through Wireframe Review Checklist (Doc 3.6).
    • Cross-check with UX goals and flows.
  2. Peer Feedback
    • Use Peer Wireframe Feedback Sheet (Doc 3.9).
    • Incorporate suggestions, fix gaps.
  3. Lead Sign-Off
    • Final review by Design Lead.
    • Store approved drafts in Figma folder: Project > Wireframes > Approved.

Stage D – Transition to UI

  1. Handoff Prep
    • Organize frames by ID/order.
    • Merge into Wireflow Mapping Sheet (Doc 3.4) for flow + layout view.
  2. Approval & Lock
    • Apply Wireframe Approval SOP (Doc 3.10).
    • Mark files as “Locked for UI.”

5. Roles & Responsibilities

  • Designer Assigned → Creates wireframe drafts, annotations, states.
  • Peer Designer → Reviews logical/structural quality.
  • Design Lead → Approves final drafts, ensures business/user alignment.
  • PM (Optional) → Validates against business goals.

6. Governance

  • Wireframes cannot move to UI stage without approval.
  • Missing state variants or incomplete annotations = automatic revision.
  • Consistency in spacing and layout rules is mandatory.

Outcome: UX flows become concrete wireframe drafts with structure, states, and annotations — ready to transition smoothly into UI design.

Checklist: UX Flow Completeness

Purpose

To ensure UX flows are end-to-end, logical, and robust — covering all tasks, decisions, and states before wireframe execution.


Flow Completeness Checklist

ItemCheckStatus (☑/✗)Notes
Flow BoundariesStart and end points are clearly defined  
Task CoverageAll tasks/sub-tasks from Task Scenario Breakdown are included  
Decision PointsEach decision has ≥ 2 branches (Yes/No, Success/Fail)  
Happy PathCore flow is clearly documented  
Error PathsAll error/exception paths included (timeouts, invalid inputs, API fails)  
Empty StatesEmpty states mapped for data-driven screens  
Loading StatesLoading indicators defined  
Permission StatesRole-based access restrictions included where relevant  
System ResponsesEach step has a defined system reaction (confirmation, error, redirect)  
ConsistencyNaming conventions, IDs (F1, F2…) consistent across flow  
ClarityNo ambiguous steps (e.g., “user does something”)  
AnnotationsNotes for dev/PM included where needed  
Business AlignmentFlow supports stated business & success goals  
User AlignmentFlow resolves core user goals & pain points  
Review DonePeer review completed  
Sign-OffDesign Lead approved  

Usage Notes

  • Fill this checklist during peer review of UX flows.
  • A flow cannot move to wireframes until all boxes are ☑.
  • Keep checklist stored alongside final flow diagram for audit.

Outcome: Guarantees that every UX flow is complete, logical, and resilient, preventing redesigns during wireframes or dev.

Framework: UX Navigation Depth Model

Purpose

To provide a structured approach for designing and validating navigation depth across apps, dashboards, and websites — ensuring clarity, efficiency, and scalability.


Why This Matters

  • Deep, inconsistent navigation = user confusion + higher drop-offs.
  • Over-simplified navigation = cluttered menus + decision fatigue.
  • A depth model defines how far nesting is allowed, when to branch, and when to redirect.

Navigation Depth Rules

Depth LevelDefinitionBest Use CasesDesign ConsiderationsExample
Level 0 (Home/Root)Entry point of systemDashboard, Landing PageAlways accessible via logo/homeSaaS dashboard home
Level 1 (Primary)First-level optionsMain menu itemsKeep < 7 items, use clear labels“Projects,” “Reports,” “Settings”
Level 2 (Secondary)Sub-options under primarySub-sections of a featureAvoid > 5 per parent; use icons/breadcrumbs“Project > Tasks”
Level 3 (Tertiary)Deeper nested sectionsAdvanced settings, edge flowsLimit to essentials; collapse rarely used“Settings > Permissions > Roles”
Level 4+Deep nesting beyond tertiaryOnly if unavoidable (e.g., admin tools)Warn: redesign/flatten recommended“System > Config > Advanced > Logs”

Validation Rules

  1. Breadcrumbs Required if depth ≥ 2.
  2. Max Depth = 3 for standard apps/web. Beyond that, trigger redesign.
  3. Redirect vs. Nest:
    • If flow is critical and frequent → keep at Level 1–2.
    • If rarely used → bury at Level 3 or behind search.
  4. Consistency: Same level = same hierarchy across product.

Example: SaaS Dashboard Navigation

  • Level 0: Dashboard Home
  • Level 1: Projects, Reports, Settings
  • Level 2 (Projects): Task List, Timeline, Files
  • Level 3 (Settings → Permissions): Roles, Access Levels

Result: User never needs > 3 clicks to access core functionality.


Usage Notes

  • Apply this model during UX Flow Planning (EPIC 2.5).
  • Use Navigation Depth Model diagram as part of flow diagrams.
  • Test depth during heuristic evaluation for “minimalist navigation” rule.
  • If depth grows too complex, consider search, tabs, or progressive disclosure instead.

Outcome: Navigation stays shallow, consistent, and predictable, reducing friction and preventing user disorientation.

Framework: Interaction-State Coverage Model

Purpose

To standardize the handling of interaction states (Empty, Loading, Success, Error, Permission) across all flows and screens, ensuring designs are resilient, predictable, and developer-ready.


Why This Matters

  • Users don’t just see the “ideal” flow → they encounter delays, errors, and access issues.
  • Missing states = broken experience, frustrated users, costly dev clarifications.
  • This framework makes state coverage mandatory, not optional.

Interaction-State Coverage Matrix

State TypeDefinitionExamples in ProductDesign Considerations
Empty StateWhen no data/content is available yetEmpty dashboard, “no results found”Use friendly text, guidance (“Add your first project”), simple illustrations
Loading StateSystem fetching/processing dataDashboard fetching tasksSkeleton screens, spinners with clear messaging (“Loading your tasks…”)
Success StateDesired outcome completedForm submission, task createdShow confirmation, reinforce next action (“Invite your team”)
Error StateAction/system failedPayment failed, API timeoutClear error message, retry option, support link
Permission StateUser lacks required access/roleNon-admin opening admin settingsExplain restriction, suggest next step (e.g., “Contact admin”)

Implementation Process

  1. At the Flow Drafting Stage
    • For each step, ask: “What happens if data = empty? Loading? Error?”
    • Add state notes into the UX Flow Diagram.
  2. At Wireframe Stage
    • Create multi-state wireframe variants (Doc 3.7).
    • Label clearly (Empty / Loading / Success / Error / Permission).
  3. At Design QA Stage
    • Validate that all states exist and follow guidelines.
    • Use the Interaction-State Coverage Checklist (part of QA).

Usage Notes

  • Always show at least one example screen per state in Figma.
  • Keep messaging consistent (e.g., same tone for all error states).
  • Avoid dead ends → every state must suggest an action (retry, invite, contact support).
  • Coordinate with devs to ensure state handling aligns with backend responses.

Outcome: No UX flow goes live with missing states, ensuring predictable, resilient experiences that reduce user frustration and dev rework.

SOP: UX Flow Planning & Definition Process

1. Purpose

To define a structured, repeatable process for converting task scenarios and journey maps into clear UX flows, ensuring consistency, completeness, and developer alignment.


2. Scope

  • Applies to all new features, redesigns, or major UX updates.
  • Used by designers, PMs, and leads before wireframe execution.

3. Step-by-Step Process

Stage A – Preparation

  1. Review Inputs
    • Task Scenario Breakdown Sheet (Doc 2.1).
    • User Journey Map (Doc 2.2).
    • Discovery Summary Deck (EPIC 1.10).
  2. Define Flow Boundaries
    • Start point → end point.
    • Clarify what’s in scope vs. out of scope.

Stage B – Drafting Flows

  1. Create Flow Steps
    • Break user goals into flow steps with IDs (F1, F2, …).
    • Include happy path + error/edge cases.
  2. Map Decision Points
    • Use diamond nodes for all decision logic.
    • Each decision must have ≥ 2 branches (Yes/No, Success/Fail).
  3. Document System Responses
    • Capture backend/API/system behaviors for each step.
    • Include loading, empty, error states.

Stage C – Validation & Collaboration

  1. Peer Review
    • Share draft with another designer for logical completeness.
    • Use UX Flow Completeness Checklist (Doc 2.8).
  2. PM/Stakeholder Review
    • Validate flows against business goals & success metrics.
    • Annotate open questions for dev clarity.
  3. Dev Alignment (Optional)
    • If technical dependencies exist, validate with dev lead.

Stage D – Finalization

  1. Update Flow Diagram
    • Use UX Flow Diagram Template (Doc 2.4).
    • Clean up branches, ensure IDs are consistent.
  2. Sign-Off
    • Design Lead approves final flow.
    • Store in project repo → “Flows → Approved.”
  3. Transition to Wireframes
    • Use flows as blueprint for Wireframe Specification Template (EPIC 3).

4. Roles & Responsibilities

  • Designer Assigned → Creates flow steps, drafts diagram, documents notes.
  • Peer Designer → Reviews flow completeness.
  • PM/Account Manager → Validates against goals.
  • Design Lead → Approves final flow.
  • Dev Lead (Optional) → Confirms feasibility if complex logic.

5. Governance

  • No wireframes can begin until flows are signed off.
  • Flows missing edge cases or error states → sent back for revision.
  • Repeated violations → escalated to Delivery Head.

6. Review & Ownership

  • Owner: Design Lead.
  • Review Cycle: Flows should be revalidated if business goals or features shift.
  • Audit: Random monthly checks by lead for flow hygiene.

Outcome: Every UX flow is complete, logical, and validated, preventing costly redesigns during wireframe or dev stages.