TLDR, Key Lessons:

Optimizing exclusively for one team's workflow can create barriers for others. What feels natural internally might feel confusing externally, limiting who can actually benefit from the solution.

When people keep coming back despite a challenging experience and actively share feedback, it's proof you're solving a problem that genuinely matters to them

The Problem

Figma prototypes felt fake when testing forms. When designers needed to show how a login screen or contact form would work, they hit a wall: there was no way to actually "type" into input fields. This made three things harder:

• Getting honest feedback from users during testing

• Showing stakeholders how the product would really feel
  
  

The workarounds wasted time and still looked wrong. Team tried building separate screens for each typing state, creating dozens of variants, or using complicated external tools. Forms could take hours to prototype properly. And it still felt clunky.

Bad prototypes = bad decisions. When test participants interact with unrealistic prototypes, their feedback is less useful. You're making product decisions based on incomplete information and focusing on the wrong thing.

The solution

Recognizing this bottleneck was slowing us down and wasting our team's time, I built a plugin that automates the manual work of creating form interactions. The goal was simple: eliminate hours of repetitive screen-building per prototype and let designers focus on testing real user behavior instead of faking interactions.

What started as an internal productivity tool has since gained traction beyond the team, validating that this was a widespread pain point in the design community.

Workflow

A simple plugin that makes form fields actually work. Here's the workflow:

1. Select existing Input component instance from the design system (or generate new)

2. Set defaults of common input data as 'Value', 'Placeholder', and 'Label'

3. Select Screens where you want to use them, and generate interactive inputs

4. When you present the prototype (or stakeholders are interacting), clicking on the field will allow typing via keyboard and dynamically updating it. Placeholder disappears, Value updates, etc.

That's it. No extra screens to build, no complex setup

Why This Matters

• Time saved, focus shifted: Instead of spending time on repetitive manual work, designers can now focus on what actually matters: coming up with ideas, solving problems, and testing with users.

• More testing, better ideas: Faster prototyping means testing more concepts in the same timeframe. More iterations = learning what works faster = higher quality final solutions.

  
  

• Creative freedom unlocked: Team members stopped killing their own ideas before trying them. When prototyping something new doesn't require hours of tedious work, people are more willing to experiment and explore unconventional solutions.

  
  

• Lower barrier to experimentation: Ideas that would've been dismissed as "too much effort to prototype" now get tested. This removed a hidden filter that was limiting the team's creative output.

  
  

Bad

Built for us, not for everyone. Since the plugin started as an internal tool solving our specific workflow, the initial user experience wasn't great for designers outside the team. Users had to adapt to how we worked rather than the plugin adapting to them.

Good

People kept coming back. Despite the rough edges, usage data showed designers returning to use it again. More importantly, they were willing to spend time sharing detailed feedback, suggesting improvements, and explaining their specific use cases, a signal that the core value was there, even if the experience wasn't polished.

I listened and adjusted. Their feedback revealed where the plugin was fighting against real-world setups. While the core workflow stayed the same, I made it more flexible based on what users actually needed, meeting them where they are instead of forcing a rigid process.

Broader UX and product lessons derived from this experience that are worth remembering and applying elsewhere

Optimizing exclusively for one team's workflow can create barriers for others. What feels natural internally might feel confusing externally, limiting who can actually benefit from the solution.

When people keep coming back despite a challenging experience and actively share feedback, it's proof you're solving a problem that genuinely matters to them