Drupal AI UX meeting 30 March 2026
>>> [!note] Migrated issue
<!-- Drupal.org comment -->
<!-- Migrated from issue #3565730. -->
Reported by: [kristen pol](https://www.drupal.org/user/8389)
>>>
<h1 id="ai-ux-meeting-notes-march-30-2026">AI UX Meeting Notes — March 30, 2026</h1>
<h2 id="meeting-overview">Meeting Overview</h2>
<p><strong>Attendees:</strong> Aidan, Ángela Saldaña Emma Horrell,<br>
<strong>Context:</strong> First full meeting after DrupalCon Chicago. Sprint planning meeting scheduled for the following day.</p>
<hr>
<h3 id="default-information-tools-interactive-ui">Default Information Tools — Interactive UI</h3>
<ul>
<li>Bruno demonstrated Ángela's Figma design and a working prototype for replacing the raw YAML editor on the Agent detail page with a two-tab system (Interactive mode as default, YAML mode for developers). The interactive mode provides a form-based UI for configuring default information tools that currently require manual YAML entry.</li>
<li><strong>Field order decision:</strong> The team agreed the field order should be <strong>Key → Tool → Label → Description → Parameters</strong>, moving the tool selector higher since it's the first decision a user makes. Parameters should use <strong>Name</strong> and <strong>Value</strong> as field labels (not "key/value" to avoid confusion with the top-level Key field). Ángela noted that parameter fields currently lack labels, which is an accessibility issue to fix.</li>
</ul>
<h3 id="flowdrop-ui-tool-categorization-challenge">FlowDrop UI & Tool Categorization Challenge</h3>
<ul>
<li>Aidan showed the FlowDrop tools UI to illustrate a broader problem: tool discoverability and categorization. The "Tools API" category alone bundles ~350 items, making it very difficult for users to find what they need.</li>
<li>The team discussed categorization strategies — by module, by action type, or by user goal. Emma noted users typically arrive at tools through a module/recipe installation path, not by browsing all tools.</li>
<li><strong>Agreed takeaways:</strong> Focus first on organizing Drupal Core tools into meaningful categories. Contrib tools can naturally group under their module. The existing UX feature categories (Content Creation, People & Accounts, Safety & Compliance, etc.) from <code>organizing_ai_modules_and_features.md</code> may inform the approach, but a "tools and tools" label obviously won't work. This is flagged as a larger problem to solve, not resolved this meeting.</li>
</ul>
<h3 id="ai-review-system-scope-workflow">AI Review System — Scope & Workflow</h3>
<ul>
<li>Aidan proposed <strong>splitting AI Review into two phases:</strong> Phase 1 delivers scoring and feedback display only; Phase 2 tackles programmatic application of feedback to source content. The team unanimously agreed — mapping AI-generated feedback back to individual entity fields (which may include entity references, multiple text fields, etc.) is a significantly harder technical problem than generating the review itself.</li>
<li><strong>Scoring widget concept:</strong> Users define custom review categories (e.g., tone & voice, SEO, legal compliance) with their own scoring methodology. Small scoring widgets display on Node Edit showing current scores per category. Widgets could use different visual formats (circle/percentage, traffic light, numeric). Scores could also appear in Views rows for background content auditing across many pages.</li>
<li><strong>Review workflow (Phase 1):</strong> Run review → see scores on Node Edit → click for detailed feedback → feedback displayed as a bulleted checklist → user opts into specific feedback items (default is not-applied) → "work on it" mode presents a task list with copy buttons so users can manually apply changes. Similar to Word track changes accept/reject workflow.</li>
<li><strong>Existing modules reviewed:</strong> AI Content Suggestions (single-field only, essentially a GPT wrapper — not useful) and AI Content Advisor (forked from AI SEO Analyzer; renders full entity for review but doesn't integrate with CCC). The new AI Review module should improve on Content Advisor by adding scoring, CCC integration, and the widget-based UI.</li>
<li><strong>UX notes on the Figma:</strong> Table rows can't easily be accordions in Drupal Views. The "revision" column tracks when a review was last run. Rerunning individual criteria makes sense (e.g., rerun just legal compliance after fixing legal issues), but rerunning should primarily be triggered from Node Edit, not the overview page, since that's where edits happen.</li>
<li><strong>Phase 2 vision:</strong> Inline flags on rendered content (like Textually module) where users accept/reject feedback directly on the page. The checklist/copy-paste workflow from Phase 1 is a stepping stone toward this.</li>
</ul>
<h3 id="drupalcon-chicago-follow-up-driesnote-projects">DrupalCon Chicago Follow-Up / Driesnote Projects</h3>
<ul>
<li>The Driesnote demo video contains multiple implied projects, each representing weeks of production work. Aidan wants to itemize these projects and determine which go into innovation vs. production track.</li>
<li>The demo prototype work has been in a separate private repo — needs to be moved into a public track.</li>
<li>Arian will discuss with Raki at the planning meeting the next day and schedule a follow-up meeting with Aidan to break down the Driesnote demo into discrete projects with UX considerations.</li>
</ul>
<h2 id="decisions">Decisions</h2>
<ul>
<li><strong>Field order for Default Information Tools interactive UI:</strong> Key → Tool → Label → Description → Parameters</li>
<li><strong>Parameter field labels:</strong> Name and Value</li>
<li><strong>AI Review split into two phases:</strong> Phase 1 = scoring + feedback display; Phase 2 = programmatic feedback application</li>
<li><strong>AI Review feedback default state:</strong> Feedback items default to not-applied; users opt in to specific items</li>
<li><strong>Tool categorization:</strong> Prioritize organizing Drupal Core tools first; broader categorization is a future project</li>
</ul>
<h2 id="useful-links">Useful Links</h2>
<ul>
<li>Ángela shared her Figma designs: <a href="https://www.figma.com/design/wOXNU8jwC7IYwnhaptTTiB/Drupal-AI--AI-Review-System?node-id=27-4109&t=P4ZykjHwgCmp7mYj-1">Figma — AI Review System</a></li>
<li>Christoph's spec document: <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CGfIy9c9ADMQKpyPGMi3vs_v2RsffmTY6JP9FoFwHgg/edit?tab=t.0">Google Doc — AI Review Specs</a> (may require access from Christoph)</li>
</ul>
<h2 id="next-steps">Next Steps</h2>
<ul>
<li><strong>Ángela:</strong> Update Figma designs for Default Information Tools based on agreed field order (Key → Tool → Label → Description → Parameters); add Name/Value labels to parameter fields</li>
<li><strong>Ángela:</strong> Update AI Review Figma to reflect Phase 1 scope (scoring widgets + checklist feedback, no auto-apply)</li>
<li><strong>Bruno:</strong> Continue Default Information Tools prototype implementation with new field order</li>
<li><strong>Arian:</strong> Discuss Driesnote projects at planning meeting; schedule follow-up with Aidan and Raki to itemize demo projects</li>
<li><strong>Aidan:</strong> Send any sprint issues to Arian before the planning meeting; follow up on Christoph's spec doc access for Emma</li>
<li><strong>Emma:</strong> Check North America Slack channel about DrupalCon video timeline</li>
</ul>
> Related issue: [Issue #3565729](https://www.drupal.org/node/3565729)
issue