Human-Centered Design Validator: AI Accessibility & Usability Auditor¶

Creatives optimize for portfolios and award juries, not end-users. Beautiful designs often fail accessibility standards, usability heuristics, and inclusive design principles—costing clients conversions and exposing them to legal risk. Inspired by HN's "Websites Are for Humans" article, what if AI could be a ruthless human-advocacy auditor?

App Concept¶

Upload designs (Figma URLs, screenshots, live websites) for instant AI-powered human-centered audit
Tests 50+ criteria: WCAG accessibility, readability scores, color contrast, cognitive load, mobile usability
Simulates user personas: elderly users, ADHD users, screen reader users, low-bandwidth users
AI generates annotated mockups showing every issue with severity ratings (critical/medium/minor)
Prescriptive fixes: "Increase font size to 16px", "Add alt text", "Reduce animation speed"
Real-time Figma/Adobe XD plugin for validation during design process
"Human score" metric (0-100) that clients can mandate in contracts

Core Mechanism¶

Browser automation (Playwright) + computer vision models analyze designs
Accessibility rules engine covering WCAG 2.2 AAA standards
Cognitive load analysis: counts UI elements, measures visual hierarchy clarity
Readability algorithms (Flesch-Kincaid) on all copy
Simulated impairments: color blindness, low vision, tremor (difficult clicking)
A/B tested best practices database: "Users convert 23% better with this button placement"
Integration with design tools for instant feedback loops
Generates compliance reports for legal/procurement teams

Monetization Strategy¶

Freemium: 3 audits/month, basic accessibility checks
Professional ($39/month): Unlimited audits, Figma/XD plugins, priority fixes, historical tracking
Agency tier ($199/month): White-label reports, multi-project dashboards, team training modules
Enterprise: Custom compliance rules, API access, SOC 2 certification
Affiliate revenue: Partner with accessibility remediation services for complex fixes

Viral Growth Angle¶

Public shaming (ethically): "Big brands failing basic accessibility" viral posts
"Human score" becomes an industry benchmark clients demand (like Lighthouse scores)
Designers share their "100/100 human score" badges on portfolio sites
Meme format: "Aesthetically stunning [0/100 usability]" vs "Boring [98/100]"
Free tier creates army of advocates catching Fortune 500 accessibility fails
Award shows add "human-centered design" categories, requiring validator certification

Existing projects¶

Lighthouse - Google's auditor, but focuses on performance over humans
axe DevTools - Accessibility testing, not holistic human-centered design
WAVE - Browser extension for accessibility, limited automation
Stark - Figma plugin for color contrast, narrower scope
UsabilityHub - User testing platform, not automated AI validation

Evaluation Criteria¶

Emotional Trigger: Be indispensable (avoid lawsuits, win ethical clients), limit risk (WCAG compliance), evoke magic (perfect usability scores)
Idea Quality: Rank: 9/10 - HN's "Websites Are for Humans" shows strong demand; legal/ethical pressures accelerating
Need Category: Stability & Opportunity Needs (protecting reputation, winning ethical clients), Legacy & Influence Needs (creating inclusive work)
Market Size: 20M+ web designers/developers globally, $10B accessibility compliance market growing 15%/year
Build Complexity: High - Requires accessibility rules engine, vision models, browser automation, design tool APIs
Time to MVP: 5-6 months with AI agents (basic WCAG checks + Figma plugin + scoring algorithm)
Key Differentiator: First platform combining accessibility, usability, AND cognitive load testing with AI-powered fixes across design and development workflows