‍

‍

Behind every good AI output is a human who knew how to ask the right questions.

‍

‍

‍

When AI tools first entered our workspaces, many people rushed to treat them as shortcuts. I remember sitting in an office when a senior colleague typed “Write a brand strategy” into ChatGPT, leaned back, and waited. In seconds, the screen filled with neat, polished paragraphs. He smiled, said “done,” and closed his laptop without even reading.

‍

That moment worried me — not because AI was impressive, but because it was being used in the most careless way possible. No thought. No context. No human touch. Just a vending-machine approach to creativity.

‍

As designers, we know better. Our work has never been about shortcuts. It’s about untangling complex human needs, balancing constraints, and turning messy realities into clear, usable systems. It’s patient work, and deeply human. Watching that process be reduced to “prompt hacks” or clickbait lists feels like watching craft dissolve into gimmick.

‍

The irony is that the skills many assume are now irrelevant — empathy, clarity, strategic judgment — are exactly the ones this new technology needs most. AI on its own doesn’t think, reason, or care. It predicts. It arranges words, pixels, or frames based on probability. What comes out depends entirely on what we put in.

‍

That’s why prompts are not “magic spells.” They are blueprints. A lazy prompt creates generic output. A thoughtful prompt creates something closer to purpose. And purpose is what design has always been about.

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

Why mediocrity is the real risk

AI won’t replace designers. The real danger is when people treat its first draft as the finished product. That’s how bias sneaks in. That’s how “good enough” becomes a standard.

‍

Designers know that no work is finished after one attempt. We test, critique, and refine. We don’t call something “intuitive” just because one person can use it — we ask how it works for many. But AI encourages a solo workflow. One person writes a prompt, accepts the output, and moves on. There’s no feedback loop, no collaboration, no accountability. It’s an echo chamber dressed up as productivity.

‍

And then there are the so-called “prompt hacks” — instructions that make text longer, shinier, more dramatic. But style without substance isn’t design. The only way to get meaningful results is by embedding context, constraints, and clarity from the start.

‍

Designers already have the skills

Here’s the good news: we don’t need to invent new abilities to work with AI. We’ve been practicing them for years. Writing a good prompt isn’t that different from writing a research plan, building a wireframe, or sketching a user flow. All of these are ways of guiding messy human needs toward structured outcomes.

‍

We bring three critical skills AI can’t replicate:

• Empathy. We understand the user’s state of mind and can shape outputs that meet people where they are — whether that means sounding reassuring, avoiding jargon, or giving examples that connect to daily life.
• Guardianship of consequences. AI doesn’t know the stakes. Designers do. We can set boundaries — don’t spread medical claims, don’t ignore accessibility, don’t fabricate sources. We act as the filter before outputs reach real users.
• Strategic judgment. AI can execute, but it doesn’t ask, should this exist? Designers do. We choose the right form, the right channel, and the right depth for a solution.

‍

A quick checklist

If you’re shaping prompts, think of them as design briefs. Ask yourself:

1. Who is this for, and what do they already know?

2. What emotional tone should the output carry?

3. What problem am I trying to solve, and is text even the best format?

4. What facts must be correct, and what limits must I set?

5. How will I review and test the result before sharing it?

‍

These aren’t tricks. They’re habits of good design — habits we already have.

‍

Knowing when to step away

AI can take us part of the way, fast. It can spark ideas, give us variations, or help test different structures. But the last stretch — the nuance, the voice, the trust — still belongs to us. That’s where the real craft lives.

‍

If we hand everything over to the model, we get something that looks fine but feels empty. But if we use AI as a collaborator in exploration, not as a replacement, it accelerates our process without diluting our standards.

‍

Why designers need to lead

This moment calls for leadership from designers. Not because AI is bad, but because without us, it risks becoming shallow. We know how to translate human needs into clear instructions. We know how to question, test, and refine. We know how to create with empathy and intention.

‍

If we don’t step up, others will define the standards — and they will almost certainly aim lower. However, if we do, we can ensure that AI supports creativity instead of stifling it.

‍

The empty prompt box is not a gimmick. It’s the newest canvas for design. And it’s time we claim it.

‍

***

Subscribe for more from me on UI, UX, Product, and AI here on Medium, and find me over on LinkedIn, X.

‍

‍

Aram Andreasyan
Industry Leader, Design Expert

‍

‍