I inherited a design system in name only. It had two competing button families with no clear rule for which to use, 85% of the icon library as unnamed loose vectors, a color reference page where every swatch listed the same hex code regardless of the actual color, and typography and palette duplicated across multiple pages with no single source of truth.
Rather than patching individual screens, I ran the library through a governed release cycle, from v1.0 audit to v1.1–v1.2 consolidation to v1.3 baseline. Each version was published, changelogged, and versioned like software, not redesigned like a moodboard.

Auditing what was actually there
Before fixing anything, I mapped the real state of the library against what it claimed to be. I checked which components were genuinely reusable, which were duplicated copies pretending to be instances, where Figma Variables existed but were bound to the wrong value, and where documentation had simply gone stale. The audit turned a vague sense of "this is messy" into a prioritized, gravity-ranked list of what to keep as-is, consolidate, refactor, deprecate, or build from scratch.

From consolidation to developer handoff
Two release cycles later, 156 icons were componentized and renamed under one convention, broken Variable bindings were fixed, and duplicated typography and color pages were merged into one source of truth. The v1.3 baseline shipped with a full developer handoff guide, including 38 components documented across Atoms, Molecules, Navigation, Cards & Content and Forms & Funnel, tokens exported to code, and a MAJOR.MINOR versioning rule so the next change doesn't reopen the same chaos.



