FOR DESIGN

Design QA and Handoff from a Screen Recording

An agent-readable screen recording turns design QA into pinned, coordinate-anchored notes. Walk the built UI against the mock and point — each “this spacing is off” is bound to the exact element and frame, so the developer’s agent gets pixels, not adjectives.

The whole loop in under a minute. Tap for sound.

One recorder, every workflow

Clipy is for every use case

Same loop, whatever your team does: record once, share one link, and an AI agent reads it and acts. Switch roles to see it play out.

Talk through the store admin once. The agent files the tickets.

admin.shopika.com/ordersREC 0:00
shopika
Orders
148 open · 12 unfulfilled
Filters ▾
Settings
0:00 / 0:10 · dots = frames the agent gets

A teammate watches this in 0:10.

Under 10s

Agent-ready fast

Chunks stream to the server while you record, so the moment you stop the summary, key-moment frames, and transcript are already building — a short clip is agent-ready in seconds.

Proprietary

Our own pipeline

On-device transcription and key-moment fusion we built ourselves — not a third-party API bolted on — tuned for speed and for the exact context an agent needs to act.

One link

Fastest agent loop

The fastest agent-ready screen recorder: one link a teammate watches and an AI agent reads. No ticket, no repro write-up, no re-explaining.

The build doesn’t match the mock, and your feedback is adjectives

The feature shipped and it’s wrong. The CTA feels cramped, the card corners are too sharp, that blue isn’t your blue. So you drop a Figma comment — “spacing looks off here” — or mark up a screenshot with a red arrow and a note that says “tighten this.” The developer reads “off” and “tighten,” guesses at what you meant, and ships a second pass that’s still not right. Now you’re in round three of a QA loop that should have been one exchange, because every note you gave was a feeling instead of a number, and none of them pointed at an element the developer could actually find.

How it works

  1. 1

    Walk the build against the mock

    Point at each mismatch and say what it should be — “CTA spacing 20px, mock says 32px.”

  2. 2

    Every note gets coordinates

    Clipy captures the frame and the click/hover target, so “this” resolves to the exact element.

  3. 3

    The dev’s agent applies it

    It reads the pinned deltas against your components and proposes the CSS fixes in the working tree.

Pixel-precise pins, not “looks off” comments

Design QA breaks down when the note is an adjective. “Make it breathe more” isn’t a change a developer can apply; a value is. An agent-readable screen recording lets you walk the built UI and state the delta out loud — “CTA padding is 20px, the mock says 32px” — while you point at the button. Clipy captures the click and hover target with real coordinates on Mac-app and Chrome-extension recordings, so “this button’s padding” resolves to a specific element, and the number you said rides along with the frame at that instant.

What lands is a fix unit, not a vibe: the element, the current value, and the intended value. The developer’s agent gets padding 20px should be 32px — something it can change — instead of a comment it has to interpret.

  • The element, not a region

    Coordinates plus the node under your cursor mean “this card’s shadow” is a specific element, not a red arrow floating over a screenshot.

  • The number is the note

    Say the measured delta — “radius is 4px, should be 12px” — and it lands in the transcript, pinned to the frame you were pointing at.

  • A delta an agent can apply

    20px to 32px is a code change. “Feels cramped” is a conversation. The recording carries the first kind.

The frame is the before, the mock is the after

Design QA is a comparison — what got built against what you designed. A normal review makes you supply both sides by hand: crop the built UI, open the mock, draw arrows between them. An agent-readable screen recorder does the capture for you. Each key moment extracts the frame at the exact second you pointed, so the built state ships as an image with the note, and the target value you spoke is the other side of the delta.

The developer’s agent gets both halves without a screenshot session: the current frame from the recording and the intended value from your words. No re-capturing the build, no cropping, no arrow-drawing — the moment you said “this one” is already the before.

  • Built state captured automatically

    The frame at the instant you pointed is the before screenshot, extracted for you — no separate capture pass to show what shipped.

  • Your words carry the target

    “Should be 32px, our --space-8 token” — the intended value travels in the transcript beside the frame that shows what’s there now.

  • One note, one comparison

    Each pin is self-contained: one element, one current value, one target — a delta the developer can act on without re-watching.

The developer’s agent applies the fix

The loop closes on the build side. The developer hands the recording link to their coding agent — Claude Code, Cursor, or Codex — which reads the recording as a structured document: the summary, the key moments with frames and click coordinates, and the full transcript. It maps each pinned delta to the component in the working tree and proposes the change — padding 20px becomes 32px, the wrong hex becomes the brand token, the heading weight goes from 500 to 600. You review the diff, or the rebuilt screen, instead of writing a second round of comments.

Because chunks stream to the server while you record, a short QA pass is agent-ready within seconds of hitting stop — the fastest agent-ready screen recorder, so the fixes are drafted while the review is still fresh.

  • Deltas map to components

    The agent greps your codebase for the button it can see in the frame and edits the rule — it isn’t guessing which file from an adjective.

  • Review the diff, not round two

    The next thing you look at is the proposed change, not another comment thread re-explaining what “off” meant.

  • Works with your dev’s agent

    Public links resolve through the Clipy skill; private recordings and library search go through the Clipy MCP server (@clipy/mcp).

A pricing-page QA pass becomes four pixel-fixes

A designer QAs the shipped pricing page against the Figma mock and records a 90-second agent-readable screen recording. They point at the primary button — “CTA padding is 20px, the mock says 32px, that’s our --space-8 token.” They hover a plan card — “border radius is 4px here, should be 12px.” They point at the plan heading — “wrong weight, that’s 500, the mock is 600.” They point at the accent link — “that blue is #2563eb, the token is --color-primary.” Then they hit stop. Seconds later the agent-readable document arrives with four key moments, each carrying the frame, the element under the cursor, and the spoken delta. The developer pastes the link into Claude Code, which maps each note to the pricing-page components and proposes the change: CTA padding 20px to 32px, card radius 4px to 12px, heading weight 500 to 600, accent swapped to the brand token. The designer reviews the diff and approves. One recording, four exact fixes, and not a single “can you clarify what you meant by off.”

  • Numbers, not adjectives

    Every note is a measured delta pinned to the element you pointed at — padding 20px to 32px — so the developer gets a value to change, not a feeling to interpret.

  • The built state is captured for you

    The frame you pointed at is the before, extracted automatically — no re-screenshotting the build, no cropping, no red-arrow markup on a static image.

  • The dev’s agent does the correcting

    Hand the link to Claude Code, Cursor, or Codex; it maps each delta to your components and drafts the CSS change for review, so QA notes come back as a diff.

  • Agent-ready in seconds

    Chunks stream to the server while you record, so a short QA pass is agent-ready within seconds — the fastest agent-ready screen recorder, and free.

Design QA: commented vs. recorded

The old wayWith an agent-readable recording
Flagging a mismatch“Spacing looks off” in a Figma comment, or a screenshot with a red arrow and “tighten this”Point at the element and say the delta — “padding is 20px, the mock says 32px”
Which element you meantThe developer guesses from a marked-up screenshot floating over the UIReal coordinates and the node under your cursor resolve “this button” to a specific element
The before screenshotCrop the built UI and annotate it by hand for every noteThe frame you pointed at is the before, extracted automatically
Making the fixThe developer interprets the adjective and ships a second guessThe dev’s agent maps the delta to the component and proposes the exact CSS change
Rounds to doneThree passes of “closer, but still not right”One recording of measured deltas an agent applies; you review the diff

Common questions

How do I do design QA on a build that doesn’t match the mock?

Record an agent-readable screen recording walking the built UI, and point at each mismatch while you say the measured delta — “CTA padding is 20px, the mock says 32px.” Clipy binds each spoken note to the element under your cursor and the frame at that instant, so the developer gets a specific value to change on a specific element instead of “spacing looks off.” One pass replaces a thread of adjectives.

How does the developer know which element I meant?

On Mac-app and Chrome-extension recordings, each pointer carries real coordinates and the element under the cursor, so “this button’s padding” resolves to a node in the build rather than a guess from a screenshot. The frame is extracted at the same moment, so the developer sees exactly what you were looking at when you said it.

Can the agent actually apply the CSS fix?

It can propose it. The recording gives the developer’s coding agent the delta — 20px to 32px — and the element, and the agent maps that to the component in your working tree and drafts the change for review. You approve the diff or the rebuilt screen; the agent does the edit rather than you re-explaining the note.

What kinds of design issues can I flag this way?

Anything you can point at and put a number or a token on: spacing and padding, border radius, type weight and size, color and token mismatches, alignment, and component states. Each becomes a pinned delta — the element, the current value, and the intended value — that the developer’s agent can act on directly.

Do I still take screenshots of the build for each note?

No. The frame you pointed at is the before screenshot, extracted automatically at the second you referenced it. There’s no cropping pass and no red-arrow markup — the built state and your spoken target travel together as one comparison per note.

Is this a Figma replacement?

No — it’s the QA and handoff layer on top of it. You still design in Figma; the agent-readable screen recording is how you pin what the build got wrong against that mock, with coordinates and measured deltas the developer’s agent can act on. Design stays in Figma; QA moves out of vague comment threads.

Which recordings capture click coordinates, and how fast is it ready?

The Mac app and Chrome-extension tab recordings capture clicks and hovers with their targets and coordinates — that’s what turns “this element” into a specific node. Chunks stream to the server while you record, so a short QA pass is agent-ready within seconds of stopping, best case under about 10 seconds. Recording, transcripts, key moments, and the agent-readable document are all free.