Rebuilding admin screens with structured conditional logic
AI-Assisted Redesign of a Legacy Product Management System

Rebuilding admin screens with structured conditional logic
AI-Assisted Redesign of a Legacy Product Management System

Rebuilding admin screens with structured conditional logic
AI-Assisted Redesign of a Legacy Product Management System

Role

Product Designer

Work

AI-assisted spec design, Conditional logic mapping, Behavior prototyping

Tools

Cursor, Codex, Github

Duration

1 Week

Context

InsurFact had a legacy product management system used by Admins to maintain insurance products.

As operational needs evolved, Admins wanted to redesign the old product management experience to make product setup and maintenance more clear, consistent, and manageable.

InsurFact had a legacy product management system used by Admins to maintain insurance products.

As operational needs evolved, Admins wanted to redesign the old product management experience to make product setup and maintenance more clear, consistent, and manageable.

Problem

The existing product management system had no conditional logic or structured validation.


All fields were freely editable without dependency rules or system constraints.
This created several operational risks:

Inconsistent product configurations

Logic lived only in the product owner's memory. Nothing written, nothing structured.

Lack of standardized input structure

Fields accepted any value in any combination. There was no shared standard for what a valid product record looked like.

Difficulty controlling product setup

Admins had full freedom but no guardrails. Product setup was hard to audit, review, or hand off to new team members.

Higher risk of incorrect or incomplete data

Invalid combinations could be saved silently. No validation meant data integrity issues surfaced downstream far from the point of entry.

What changed after introducing AI into the workflow

What changed after introducing AI into the workflow

Impact

Impact

Compressed Prototyping Cycle


With AI-assisted HTML scaffolding, an initial interactive version could be generated within approximately one working day.

Upstream Logic Validation



By generating behavior-driven prototypes during design, multiple logic conflicts were identified and resolved prior to engineering handoff.

Reduced Specification Friction


With AI-assisted logic modeling and interactive prototypes, conditional behavior was consolidated into:

  • A structured PRD

  • A behavior-linked prototype


What changed

Traditional Workflow

Conversation

/01

Interview the product owner and gather business rules verbally. Business logic was captured through notes and follow-up clarification meetings.

Manual Rule Structuring

/02

Translate fragmented verbal rules into written documentation.




Static Prototype Creation

/03

Create static wireframes or low-fidelity mockups to represent possible states.



Conflict Resolution During Development

/04

Edge cases and conditional conflicts were typically discovered:

  • During implementation

  • Or through QA testing


Document-Based Specification Output

/05

Finalize a PRD describing:

  • Product states

  • Field requirements

  • Conditional logic

AI-Integrated Workflow

Conversation

/01

Interview the product owner and surface implicit rules through scenario-based questioning. (This step remained unchanged. Human reasoning was essential.)

AI-Assisted Logic Modeling

/02

Use Codex (via Cursor) and Claude to organize scattered rules into structured conditional logic patterns.

AI helped:

  • Generate conditional trees

  • Identify missing states

  • Surface unclear dependencies

Logic structuring became iterative rather than linear.

Behavior-Driven Prototype Generation

/03

Generate functional HTML screens rapidly to simulate real field-level behavior.

Instead of static mockup, the prototype became:

  • An interactive logic simulator

  • A validation tool for conditional visibility

  • A shared reference for behavior discussion

Early Conflict Visibility

/04

Building the prototype exposed conflicts neither the product owner nor I had caught in conversation. Edge cases became visible only when the form had to respond to real input.


The timing of validation shifted earlier in the process.

Validated, Behavior-Linked Specification

/05

Generated structured PRDs with field-level specs, conditional rules, and state definitions. Prototype + PRD became the single source of truth for engineering.

What I did to boost the prototype generation

What I did to boost the prototype generation

I codified my design rules into a Skill, so AI could inherit structure instead of guessing at it.

Across multiple Maintenance module pages, I noticed structural drift appearing even when the underlying CRUD logic was identical. Small inconsistencies in layout order, button placement, pagination behavior, and drawer interaction were accumulating into repeated review cycles.

To fix this, I formalized a unified CRUD prototype pattern and converted it into a structured Skills, a reusable instruction set that defines every structural and interaction rule in advance.

This covered:

  • Layout skeleton: Header → Search Bar → Table → Pagination

  • Header: title format, fixed CTA position, label locked to + Add New

  • Table: column hierarchy, Actions always last, Count placement rules

  • Pagination: always visible, default 10 rows, icon-only navigation, no helper text

  • Drawer: title format, button labels by mode, non-sticky button row, right-aligned

With the Skills in place, each new prototype no longer required structural decision-making.
AI inherited the rules. Implementation became assembly, not invention.


Across multiple Maintenance module pages, I noticed structural drift appearing even when the underlying CRUD logic was identical. Small inconsistencies in layout order, button placement, pagination behavior, and drawer interaction were accumulating into repeated review cycles.

To fix this, I formalized a unified CRUD prototype pattern and converted it into a structured Skills, a reusable instruction set that defines every structural and interaction rule in advance.

This covered:

  • Layout skeleton: Header → Search Bar → Table → Pagination

  • Header: title format, fixed CTA position, label locked to + Add New

  • Table: column hierarchy, Actions always last, Count placement rules

  • Pagination: always visible, default 10 rows, icon-only navigation, no helper text

  • Drawer: title format, button labels by mode, non-sticky button row, right-aligned

With the Skills in place, each new prototype no longer required structural decision-making.
AI inherited the rules. Implementation became assembly, not invention.


Outcome

Outcome

AI-Assisted Logic Modeling

Term Insurance contained layered conditional dependencies that were difficult to reason about through static documentation alone.


Using AI, I transformed fragmented verbal explanations into a structured decision model that mapped:

  • Field visibility

  • Conditional required states

  • Mutual exclusivity constraints

  • Validation timing


This approach shifted logic definition from descriptive documentation to behavior-driven validation — making every rule explicit and testable.

AI-Assisted Screen Redesign

Before AI, building a form prototype in Figma meant designing every state manually: active, disabled, error, conditional.


With Cursor × Codex, I described the logic and the scaffold was generated in the same session.
The prototype itself was not the deliverable. The validated logic behind it was.


Since the product runs on PrimeVue, the validated logic translated directly into production components without reinterpretation.

211F1F