## TL;DR

Intentional UI changes require new baselines, but every diff must be human-reviewed first. Review the diff images, accept the intended changes, and reject anything unexpected before updating.

## Error

```text
(Not an error; a workflow. Trigger: visual tests fail because the design changed deliberately.)
```

## Steps

1. Open the diff report and review every changed image. Expected: you confirm each change is intended.
2. If any diff is unintended, file it as a bug instead of updating. Expected: no rubber-stamping.
3. Accept the intended diffs in the visual tool (Percy, Chromatic, Playwright snapshots). Expected: baselines updated.
4. Note the design change in the PR. Expected: reviewers know the baselines moved deliberately.
5. Re-run. Expected: green on the new baselines.

## When to use

- Deliberate redesigns or component updates.
- Baseline updates as a planned step.

## When not to use

- Unexpected diffs (investigate as bugs).
- You are tempted to bulk-accept without review.

## Tool compatibility

- Percy, Chromatic, Playwright toHaveScreenshot.

## Variant phrasings

### Update visual baselines

The task; review-then-accept is the workflow.

### Accept visual diffs after redesign

Same thing; the review is the point.

## Why it happens

Baselines encode the old design. A deliberate change makes them stale, but blind acceptance would also accept regressions.

## Edge cases

- Font and rendering differences across platforms cause false diffs; pin the environment.
- Animate-heavy UIs need freeze-frame setup before screenshots.
- Baseline branches should match the code branches.

## Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_nkanAtPZEVkzhL2JpHPKWg