"Check designs" passes when a raw radius value is used instead of a token

Hey hey ​@Linh-Dan Thanks for the detailed steps! I tried to reproduce this on a minimal test case and wasn't able to. In my test, Check designs correctly flagged the raw corner radius for me. I’d like narrow down what's different in your setup.

My test:

• a single frame with a tokenized fill (clean) and corner radius set to a raw `8`
• I created a local number variable `Corner/Small` = `8`, scoped to corner radius
• Running Check designs, the raw `8` showed up under the Dimensions tab with `Corner/Small` offered as a Match
• It's behaving as expected

Questions:

• Is your radius token scoped to corner radius? If a variable is scoped away from corner radius (or to a different property), Check designs may not offer it as a candidate and the raw value can pass silently. An easy one to rule out first
• Does the token's value exactly match the raw value you used? An exact match shows as "Match"; a different value should still show as a suggestion. A screenshot or quick recording could help here
• Where does the radius variable live — is it local to the file, or in a library that's added/subscribed to the file?

Thank you for the additional details! — Jaycee

Hello ​@Jaycee Lewis 

Thanks so much for getting back to me so quickly! Answers below.

1. Is your radius token scoped to corner radius?
Yes, the radius variables are scoped to corner radius. They appear as candidates when bound manually, so scoping isn't the issue.

2. Does the token's value exactly match the raw value you used?
No, the raw value is 9 and there's no token at 9, the nearest one is 8.

3. Where does the radius variable live?
It's local to the file, not in an external library.

And you’re right, I can't reproduce it consistently...

Here a screen capture:

Steps to reproduce:

I create a subframe (this is the accordion-header case) with a corner radius of 9px and a hidden background fill meant for the hover state. "Check designs" reports no problem. I make the background fill visible, and "Check designs" now detects the raw value. I leave it uncorrected.

I then place this subframe inside another frame (the accordion-item case). I build the default and hover variants. I run "Check designs", and it doesn't detect the raw radius, even though there's a visible background fill on the hover variant.

Here's a very simplified example (run "Check designs" on "Frame" component here):

I also have the same issue with radius passing, too:

Similar to this, it marks it as a pass when the raw colour’s opacity is 0%. But as soon as you set it to 1% or higher, it shows up, even suggesting a token that’s 0% opacity:

Hey ​@Damian_Summersall thanks for the additional example 🙌 

​@Linh-Dan I opened a support ticket to get all these examples onto our internal resources (ID 1975490) The ticket subject line is Check designs passes when a raw radius value is used instead of a token. I sent an additional request to help support in the initial reply. Thanks again for all your help! — Jaycee

To add to this, it’s also not showing the colour contrast fails for variables (either the foreground layers or background layers that fail).

Hey ​@Damian_Summersall 👋 You’re a legend. Two more quick questions:

• Are the flagged foreground/background colors bound to variables, or raw hex?
• Is the failing layer on a non-default variant (like the accordion hover case), or a flat single-state frame?

Talk soon! — Jaycee

Hey Jaycee,

• Both bound to variables, when they’re changed to raw hex, they show up as suggestions to bind to variables.
• It’s on the default and hover states. The screenshot shows the default state.

Hey ​@Damian_Summersall 👋 Thanks again. Here’s the support ticket ID 2000306. The ticket subject line is Check designs skips flags at 0% opacity and omits AA contrast fails for variable-bound colors. Keep an eye on your email inbox for the initial reply from me and any follow-ups from support. Thank you! – Jaycee