PYGMALIONLoading the portfolio
Winged Victory of SamothraceCosmo Wenman · Skulpturhalle Basel cast

01 / My Evolving Approach to AI Design

From generating content to doing work people can trust.

From input-output frameworks in Shimo AI to task guidance in Zoom AI Sheets and access boundaries and verification in my own tools, I explore how open-ended capabilities can fit into clear, inspectable workflows.

Explore the story
PRACTICEProduct and UX design at Shimo & Zoom
INDEPENDENT WORKProduct design & implementation for A2A & RSU
INTENT / WORKFLOW / CONTROL / VERIFICATION2023–present · A reflection across projects

FOUR QUESTIONS THROUGHOUT THE WORK

My contributions & evidence
Chapters

01 / Shimo AI · 2023

Give open-ended capabilities an interaction structure.

In Shimo AI, I began with a question: how should a product organize capabilities when people’s content needs and ways of expressing them keep changing? Preset prompts can help people get started, but are not enough to structure the whole experience. I organized the framework around user inputs and AI outputs, then mapped interactions across text, images, files, audio, and video.

INPUT → CAPABILITY → OUTPUT → WORKFIG. 01

User input

  • Text
  • Images
  • Files
  • Data
  • Audio / video

Understand, transform, generate

Task shortcuts within an extensible framework

AI output

  • A response
  • An image
  • A file
  • A chart / data
  • An editable result
Reorganized from the original Shimo AI framework. Information types describe the design space; they do not imply that every capability shipped.
Read the original interaction framework
Shimo AI · functional scenario analysis · original design

Help people articulate intent.

For image generation, the exploration broke common descriptions into selectable aspects and keywords, helping people articulate their intent without first learning to write a complete prompt.

Selectable keywords · original Shimo AI design
GENERATED CONTENT CONTINUES INTO THE WORKFIG. 02
Chart response · original design fragment

Chart → data component → sheet data

The AI panel was envisioned as a transfer point between products.

Slide outline · original design fragment

Text → outline → template → slides

The result becomes something people can keep working on.

Design exploration from Shimo AI, not a claim that cross-product transfer was released.

02 / Zoom AI Sheets · 2025–2026

Start with a task people recognize.

For Zoom AI Sheets onboarding, I organized demonstrations around data preparation, analysis, formulas, and cross-sheet work, using role and behavior to select relevant examples. The proposal lets people skip guidance and explore when ready, using a separate demo sheet to protect their real work.

Relevant task selection · original Zoom design
Guided experience in a demo sheet · original Zoom design
  1. 01

    Choose a task

    Use role and behavior as context.

  2. 02

    Try it when ready

    Allow people to skip and return.

  3. 03

    Return to real work

    Keep the demo separate from actual data.

Personalization should reduce the search for relevant capabilities, without making a lengthy profile a prerequisite for work.

03 / Context, capability & collaboration

Connect AI capabilities to the work around them.

A useful AI experience extends beyond the answer box. In these Zoom AI Sheets feature animations, I communicate how people bring in meeting context, clean existing data, request analysis, inspect a formula and return to collaboration. These are five related scenarios, not a claim that one autonomous agent completes them all.

CHOOSE THE LEVEL OF AI INVOLVEMENT

EMBEDDED

Within the cell

The AI-native formula proposal makes references and outputs part of a familiar cell calculation.

ASSISTIVE

Review a suggestion

A chart or analysis request can return a bounded suggestion that people preview or reject.

AGENTIC

Guide a multi-step task

Extraction, matching and reshaping need a visible plan and stepwise confirmation in the onboarding proposal.

The three modes come from the onboarding specification. They describe how the proposed capabilities are organized, not a single released autonomous workflow.

04 / Spreadsheet interaction design

Keep data references and action scopes explicit.

As a spreadsheet interaction designer, I focus on keeping people and AI aligned throughout the conversation: which sheet and cells provide the data, and where the result will take effect. My design principle is to keep these references and action scopes visible while people express intent, review suggestions, and confirm changes, so formulas, charts, and formatting remain grounded in the data people provide and can be checked against their source cells.

READ FROM THE DATA · ACT WITHIN THE SCOPEFIG. 04
USER INTENT

“Mark actual values below their row target in red.”

Read B2:C3Apply to B2:B3
Sales · existing cells in this example
ABC
1MonthActualTarget
2Jan82100
3Feb112100
4Mar91100
5Apr106100
Data being readCells to format
01 / DATA REFERENCE

B2:C3

Read actual values in column B and the existing targets in column C, row by row.

02 / ACTION SCOPE

B2:B3

Apply formatting only to these cells. Keep their business values unchanged.

03 / REVIEW THE SUGGESTION
Condition=B2<C2

Check references and scope → preview → confirm

Design illustration using preset example data. Switching the scope updates the references and destination; it never generates or fills in business values.

If the source is missing or the reference is unclear, ask people to select or provide the data first. AI suggestions should carry a traceable source and an explicit destination.

05 / Within familiar spreadsheet actions

Bring AI into the moment of work.

People already have familiar spreadsheet workflows: selecting data, creating charts, entering formulas, and setting conditional formatting. I want AI to appear within these actions, using the current object and selection as context. People can describe a change in a chart, explain a calculation while writing a formula, or state what they want to highlight while setting a rule, then inspect and refine the result through familiar controls.

AI should support the task already in progress. Its entry point, context, and resulting changes should belong to the same workflow.

Charts entry · original design fragment
01 / Charts

Chart range & settings

A lightweight input within chart editing uses the current data and settings. A preview leads back to the same chart and its existing controls.

“Show monthly sales trends, grouped by region.”

Original action → express intent → preview → keep editing

Formulas entry · original design fragment
02 / Formulas

References & destination

An entry near cell or formula editing turns a calculation goal into a reviewable formula, with explicit references and a destination cell.

“Calculate each row’s share of total sales.”

Original action → express intent → preview → keep editing

Conditional formatting entry · original design fragment
03 / Conditional formatting

Condition, range & style

An entry within rule creation turns the desired effect into an inspectable condition, range, and style. The result remains a standard editable rule.

“Mark sales below their row target in red.”

Original action → express intent → preview → keep editing

The original design fragments locate the entry points. The examples and preview-to-edit workflow are narrative design proposals; release status is not asserted. The sidebar remains available for open-ended and cross-object work.

06 / Explanation, native editing & fallback

Make the result understandable, editable and recoverable.

Generation is only one step. I reorganized chart settings so people can distinguish the data being used from the way it is displayed. In the formatting-rule proposal, I carried the same principle further: show the condition, range and style before applying, then keep the result in the native editor with undo and manual fallback.

FROM A GENERATED RESULT TO AN EDITABLE OBJECTFIG. 05
Chart settings
Data

Source range · series · names

Format

Title · labels · axes · grid

REVIEW BEFORE APPLYING

Condition=B2<C2
Apply toB2:B3
StyleRed text

Concept illustration based on chart review records and the formatting-rule proposal. It does not reproduce a released screen.

  1. 01

    Explain what is being changed.

    Separate data configuration from presentation. Show the references, condition and destination rather than only a finished chart or color change.

  2. 02

    Keep the original editor useful.

    Generated formulas and rules should remain standard editable objects. AI supports creation; familiar controls support precise adjustment.

  3. 03

    Define a way back.

    The proposal retains undo after applying and manual creation if AI fails or is unavailable. Keep the task context instead of making people start over.

DESIGN THE EXCEPTIONS, TOO

Generation fails

Keep the request and selected range → return to manual rule creation.

The selection changes

Retain the confirmed destination; never silently expand or replace the scope.

AI is unavailable

Preserve ordinary spreadsheet tools and respect the existing permission and usage rules.

Interaction requirements from the rule proposal, pending product and engineering review.

07 / Recent independent practice

Build boundaries and verification into the workflow.

In independent tools, I continued examining the decisions behind the interface. A2A Contract Hub explores access and delivery: who can receive which information, and how decisions are recorded. The RSU cost basis reconciler focuses on deterministic calculations and reviewable workpapers.

A2A CONTRACT HUBFIG. 06

Who can receive which information?

  1. 01

    Request

    Purpose & requested information

  2. 02

    Decision

    Allow or deny within explicit rules

  3. 03

    Record

    Decision basis & delivery receipt

Independent product design & implementation

One meeting record, two task-ready views: the internal view retains an owner email; the external view retains the action and due date, with the owner unassigned.

View source on GitHub

Local alpha · synthetic meeting demo · no live task-platform integration

Illustration of the local alpha workflow and its defined delivery boundaries.
RSU BASIS RECONCILERFIG. 07

Can the result be checked?

Proceeds$12,000
Reported basis$0
Compensation basis$10,000
Reconciled gain$2,000

12,000 − 10,000 = 2,000

Independent product design & implementation

I turn input records into deterministic calculations and reviewable workpapers. The complete built-in path currently uses a synthetic case.

View source on GitHub

Local-first prototype · real broker-PDF flow remains unverified

Synthetic figures for explanation. The project focuses on rule-based calculation and reviewable workpapers, not a running LLM agent.

08 / Cross-product delivery & validation

Carry the design through delivery and verification.

An AI interaction still has to work within a real product: file and sheet permissions, long translated labels, shared edits and failed requests. I use interaction specifications, key screens, feature animations and review with product and engineering to clarify those boundaries. I also define what to observe next, without treating a design proposal as measured success.

01

Align the workflow across products.

I aligned Meeting Sharing across Sheets and Paper. File selection, sharing and the collaborative workspace should feel like one handoff, even when several products are involved.

02

Resolve the constraints in the design.

Chart reviews include long translated labels and adjustable panel widths. Permission work distinguishes file-level toolbar states from sheet-level rules to avoid a shifting interface when people switch sheets.

03

Deliver a behavior, not only a screen.

I connect entry conditions, range behavior and exception paths to key screens and motion examples, then review them with product and engineering. A clear acceptance case matters as much as the visual.

WHAT I WOULD VERIFY NEXTVALIDATION PLAN
STARTING THE TASK

Can people find a relevant entry?

Observe task selection, skipping, importing and voluntarily opening the demo. Separate discovery from completion.

UNDERSTANDING THE RESULT

Can people explain the source and scope?

Ask people to locate a reference and the cells that will change; follow the path from the rule explanation to editing.

CONTROL & RECOVERY

Can people safely continue?

Cover apply, undo, failed generation, changed selections and shared-rule conflicts with explicit acceptance cases.

Proposed observations and acceptance checks, informed by the onboarding and rule specifications. No study results, conversion uplift or accuracy score are claimed.

Intent · workflow · control · verification

I aim to design a complete process people can understand, use and inspect.

MY CONTRIBUTIONS & EVIDENCE

PracticeMy contributionEvidence on this page
Shimo AI · 2023Interaction framework & intent articulationInput/output analysis, keyword selection & editable-output concepts
Zoom AI Sheets · onboardingTask-based onboarding & motion productionTask selection designs, onboarding specification & five original animations
Zoom AI Sheets · core interactionChart settings, rule ranges & meeting-sharing alignmentOriginal design fragments, review records & rule proposals
A2A Contract HubIndependent product design & implementationData-delivery boundaries & task-ready views · local alphaView source on GitHub
RSU Basis ReconcilerIndependent product design & implementationDeterministic calculation & reviewable workpapers · synthetic previewView source on GitHub

Team-product contributions and independent implementations are distinguished. Original animations and design proposals do not establish a release status; repository access follows existing permissions.

Next project

Shimo Forms

Designing the complete path between asking and answering.

Back to AI design