Use the Prompt
Add Your Brief
Add your context below. It will be included with the prompt when you copy or download.
Create an interactive frontend prototype using the existing project stack and explicitly labeled demo data for [PROJECT] and [AUDIENCE]. The task is: Community Moderation Queue.
Required content and structure
Review reported content, context, policy references and decision options.
Use [APPROVED_CONTENT] as the source of names, dates, figures, claims and destinations. List missing inputs before substituting anything. If a demonstration is needed, label its content as fictional. Do not invent customer quotes, rankings, partner logos or product capabilities.
Design direction
Use [BRAND_RULES] and the design system already selected in the project. If no system is supplied, start with this direction: light neutral canvas, graphite text, cobalt accent and precise hairline separators; dense but legible hierarchy. Keep type, spacing and color roles consistent. Prioritize the task over decorative elements and avoid a generic collection of unrelated cards.
Content preparation
Supply the reported content, surrounding context, report reason, applicable policy and available actions. Separate the report from the moderator's eventual finding.
Layout and behavior
Keep evidence visible while the reviewer chooses an action. Provide a reason field where needed and make reversible actions distinct from irreversible ones.
Task-specific acceptance check
- Keep evidence visible and separate reports from confirmed violations.
- Review multiple reports of the same item and a report with insufficient context.
- The screen should not pre-label an allegation as a confirmed violation.
Implementation and review
Keep text editable. Use semantic structure, descriptive controls, visible keyboard focus and appropriate empty/error states. Check narrow and wide layouts. Respect reduced-motion preferences. Preserve any existing project framework and dependencies; do not silently replace the stack. Return the editable files and explain any incomplete behavior or unsupported inputs. Review this specific task before proposing extra features.
Reference attachment and reconstruction goal
Attach reference.webp from this prompt’s download bundle alongside this prompt in OpenDesign. Build an editable result with a similar composition and hierarchy; do not embed the whole reference image as the finished interface. Preserve approved project content and brand rules if they conflict with fictional sample labels. If the image is missing or unreadable, ask for it instead of claiming visual fidelity.
Reference composition and content
Use the attached reference.webp as the visual reference for Community Moderation Queue. Before building, identify the major regions from top to bottom, their relative widths and heights, alignment, spacing, typography hierarchy, surface colors, borders, imagery and repeated components. Preserve those relationships rather than substituting a generic template. Required task content: Review reported content, context, policy references and decision options. Use the following task-specific layout guidance when translating the image into editable elements: Keep evidence visible while the reviewer chooses an action. Provide a reason field where needed and make reversible actions distinct from irreversible ones.
Visual direction from the example brief
light neutral canvas, graphite text, cobalt accent and precise hairline separators; dense but legible hierarchy.
Interaction specification
The reference is a static concept: the behavior below is a requirement to implement, not proof that the picture already works. Copy the customized prompt into your working project. Start with the core task: Review reported content, context, policy references and decision options. Keep evidence visible and separate reports from confirmed violations. For each visible control, specify its trigger, affected state and feedback; implement local changes with consistent state across related views. Give search and filters real results, selection controls an explicit active state, and save actions visible pending/success/failure feedback where relevant. Do not add unrelated workflows. Use proper links for navigation, buttons for actions and accessible names for icon controls. Do not imply a backend operation succeeded when only a local demo changed.
Visual comparison and delivery
- Compare the result with the attached image at matching proportions. Review major region placement, relative image sizes, line breaks, spacing, typography hierarchy, contrast, active states and content density before polishing decorative details.
- Then test the narrow layout without squeezing desktop text into tiny labels.
- Keep logos, photos and icons as separate assets and all meaningful labels editable. List any unavailable fonts/assets and any intentional departures. Return the working files plus a concise account of implemented behavior and remaining integrations; do not promise a pixel-identical result from the prompt alone.
Download Prompt + Image
Includes the complete prompt and full-size reference image. Attach both in OpenDesign to guide the layout.
How to Write a Community Moderation Queue Design Prompt
Use this community moderation queue design prompt to review reported content, context, policy references and decision options.
The reference is an AI-generated concept. The instructions below describe what to build and test; the image does not demonstrate working behavior.
Put Evidence Beside the Decision
A moderation dashboard supports a judgment about a report, not a verdict supplied by the report itself.
Keep the reported excerpt, surrounding context and applicable policy visible together. Keep evidence visible while the reviewer chooses an action. Provide a reason field where needed and make reversible actions distinct from irreversible ones.
From the Prompt
Keep evidence visible while the reviewer chooses an action.
Make It Your Own
Place [REPORT_REASON] beside [CONTENT_CONTEXT] and the supplied [POLICY_REFERENCE]. Label reports as unreviewed until a moderator records an outcome and reason.
Prepare the Community Moderation Queue Content
The central column keeps the reported post, reports and extended context together. Supply enough surrounding evidence to review the report without guessing from an isolated excerpt.
Supply the reported content, surrounding context, report reason, applicable policy and available actions. Separate the report from the moderator's eventual finding.
From the Prompt
Review reported content, context, policy references and decision options.
Make It Your Own
For [PROJECT], use [APPROVED_CONTENT] as the source for this community moderation queue. Supply the reported content, surrounding context, report reason, applicable policy and available actions. Separate the report from the moderator's eventual finding. Identify missing inputs before replacing them with demonstration content.
Review an Ambiguous Report
The right rail places policy guidance above mutually exclusive actions and a confirmation button. Check permissions, decision logging and the consequences of each action before applying it.
Use a report whose excerpt looks different in context. The moderator should be able to inspect that context and request more information without first choosing a punitive action. Review multiple reports of the same item and a report with insufficient context. The screen should not pre-label an allegation as a confirmed violation.
From the Prompt
Keep evidence visible and separate reports from confirmed violations.
Make It Your Own
Review the community moderation queue against this requirement: Keep evidence visible and separate reports from confirmed violations. Review multiple reports of the same item and a report with insufficient context. The screen should not pre-label an allegation as a confirmed violation. Preserve approved content and revise only the parts that fail this check.
Review Your Community Moderation Queue Result
A convincing screen is not a working backend. Test validation, permissions, persistence and failure behavior separately before connecting real data.
- Review multiple reports of the same item and a report with insufficient context. The screen should not pre-label an allegation as a confirmed violation.
Follow-Up Prompt
Use this after the first result. It narrows the revision to the most important part of this task.
Refine the current community moderation queue. Review multiple reports of the same item and a report with insufficient context. The screen should not pre-label an allegation as a confirmed violation. Preserve the approved content and visual direction; change only the parts needed to resolve these issues.
