digraph design_verification {
    rankdir=TB;

    "1. Coordinator: List all completed tickets" [shape=box];
    "2. Coordinator: Assign each ticket to a reviewer subagent" [shape=box];
    "3. Reviewer: Compare implementation with Figma design" [shape=box];
    "4. Reviewer: Leave feedback on discrepancies" [shape=box];
    "All reviews complete?" [shape=diamond];
    "5. Coordinator: Aggregate all feedback" [shape=box];
    "Done" [shape=ellipse];

    "1. Coordinator: List all completed tickets" -> "2. Coordinator: Assign each ticket to a reviewer subagent";
    "2. Coordinator: Assign each ticket to a reviewer subagent" -> "3. Reviewer: Compare implementation with Figma design";
    "3. Reviewer: Compare implementation with Figma design" -> "4. Reviewer: Leave feedback on discrepancies";
    "4. Reviewer: Leave feedback on discrepancies" -> "All reviews complete?";
    "All reviews complete?" -> "2. Coordinator: Assign each ticket to a reviewer subagent" [label="no - next ticket"];
    "All reviews complete?" -> "5. Coordinator: Aggregate all feedback" [label="yes"];
    "5. Coordinator: Aggregate all feedback" -> "Done";
}

You are a design verification coordinator. Your job is to:

1. List all completed tickets from the current branch that need design verification
2. For each ticket, dispatch a reviewer subagent with:
   - Ticket number and description
   - Figma file URL and node ID
   - Component file path(s)
3. Collect feedback from all reviewers
4. Summarize findings in a structured report

Tickets to verify:
{list of tickets with Figma URLs}

Use the Task tool to dispatch reviewer subagents in parallel where possible.

You are a design reviewer. Compare the implementation with the Figma design.

Ticket: {ticket_number}
Description: {ticket_description}
Figma URL: {figma_url}
Component files: {file_paths}

Steps:
1. Use mcp__figma-remote-mcp__get_screenshot to capture the Figma design
2. Read the component implementation files
3. Compare:
   - Layout and spacing
   - Colors and typography
   - Icons and images
   - Responsive behavior (if applicable)
   - Interactive states (hover, active, disabled)

Report format:
- MATCH: Design and implementation are identical
- DISCREPANCY: List specific differences with file:line references

Be precise. Only report actual visual differences, not code style preferences.

You: Running design verification for all completed tickets

[Coordinator starts]
Coordinator: Found 3 tickets needing design verification:
- AP-5357: 승인/반려 모달
- AP-5351: SubCategoryContainer
- AP-5352: VendorItem

[Dispatch reviewer for AP-5357]
Reviewer AP-5357:
- Fetched Figma screenshot
- Compared with ApproveModal.tsx, RejectModal.tsx
- Result: MATCH

[Dispatch reviewer for AP-5351]
Reviewer AP-5351:
- Fetched Figma screenshot
- Compared with SubCategoryContainer.tsx
- Result: DISCREPANCY
  - Line 45: padding should be 16px, currently 12px
  - Line 52: font-weight should be 600, currently 500

[Dispatch reviewer for AP-5352]
Reviewer AP-5352:
- Fetched Figma screenshot
- Compared with VendorItem.tsx
- Result: MATCH

[Coordinator aggregates]
Coordinator: Design Verification Complete
- Total tickets: 3
- Matches: 2
- Discrepancies: 1

Discrepancies to fix:
1. AP-5351 SubCategoryContainer:
   - padding: 12px → 16px
   - font-weight: 500 → 600

Done!