$60-$160/hr product and UX design work, on your schedule
Review AI-drafted interfaces, flows, and design rationale the way you'd run a crit. Flag the pattern that breaks accessibility and the flow that adds friction. Remote and paid hourly.
Trusted by top research companies
Hi, we're Zac and Jack, the founders of Terac. We want to talk to you directly, because you are the most important part of what we're building.
Terac is a community of experts. People who have spent years getting good at something specific and hard. The world is about to need more of you, not less. As AI takes on more of the world's work, the bottleneck shifts to the people who actually know what they're talking about.
Expert labor is the rarest resource in the world right now, and it is shockingly hard to find. The companies that need a design lead's eye on a broken onboarding flow spend weeks chasing people, paying placement fees, and settling for whoever is available. Meanwhile thousands of qualified people are sitting with knowledge that no one ever asks for.
That gap is what we're here to close. Every project that lands on Terac is routed to the people who actually know the answer, on their schedule, paid fairly, and only when the work is verified. No middleman taking a cut of your time. No vague gigs. No chasing checks.
We care about every single person in this community. If you join Terac, you're not a row in a database to us. We read the feedback. We answer the emails. We will fight for you when a customer is being unreasonable, and we will be honest with you when something on our side is broken. The quality of this panel is our entire company, and we owe you a serious bar.
If you've made it this far, here is what we're asking: claim your profile. Put your expertise on the record. Let the world's most ambitious teams come find you for the work only you can do.
Product & UX Design questions
Still curious? Write to us at support@terac.com.
Accessibility is one of the most consistently in-demand sub-specialties, because it is among the hardest for models to reason about. Contrast logic, focus management, and ARIA misuse fail in predictable ways for a model trained on docs alone. If you can evaluate designs against WCAG 2.2 AA or AAA and say why a violation matters, that work maps to us.
Design system work is a recognized task category. Figma-experienced reviewers assess whether AI-drafted component naming follows token standards for spacing, color, and type, whether variant logic is consistent, and whether documentation would support a developer handoff. If you have shipped and maintained a design system, that judgment is exactly the signal the tasks surface.
You are never asked to approve or certify AI outputs, only to critique them. Tasks ask you to flag where a model's usability report overstates findings, confuses observed behavior with inferred intent, or reaches conclusions the study design could not support. Your obligation to represent research accurately is the standard the rubric is graded against.
Yes. Tasks include evaluating AI-drafted service blueprints for gaps between frontstage and backstage actions, judging whether a touchpoint sequence accounts for channel-switching, and critiquing journey maps for misattributed pain points. Models tend to flatten systemic complexity into screen-by-screen flows, and a systems-level practitioner catches those reductions immediately.
Product designers are matched to visual and interaction judgment: whether a model's prototype respects established mental models, whether a navigation pattern creates orientation errors at a given IA depth, or whether a component's affordances are legible. Research methodology tasks like protocol design and survey critique are routed to researchers, so you are not asked to work outside your practice.
Why your expertise matters
Design AI ships a flow that tests poorly with real users, a heuristic audit that misclassifies findings, and a rationale that sounds like empathy but never grounds in research. Catching that takes pattern recognition from moderated studies and shipped products. Your corrections teach these tools the gap between a design that sounds right and one that works.
How pay works
Rates reach the top of the $60-$160/hr band for designers who evaluate complex interaction patterns, name a heuristic violation with design-system reasoning, or work in accessibility (WCAG 2.2 AA/AAA) or regulated interfaces. All work is fully remote and paid hourly, released on verified completion.
What the work looks like
A sample of the product and UX design work you would pick up. Every project is scoped, remote, and paid on verified completion.
- Review an AI-drafted checkout flow and annotate where the steps violate progressive disclosure or create needless cognitive load.
- Evaluate a model's heuristic audit against a set of screenshots, flagging findings that are misclassified, overstated, or missing.
- Write a worked example of an annotated wireframe critique, redirecting a junior designer whose pattern breaks WCAG 2.2 contrast.
- Rate a set of AI-drafted design rationales for specificity, separating responses grounded in user research from confident but vague ones.
- Write a usability test plan for a given feature scope, showing the task-design and recruitment criteria a senior researcher applies.
- Assess whether a model's component-naming convention for a design system follows the token standards you'd enforce in a codebase handoff.
Specialties we match
Product & UX Design projects span a wide range of focus areas. Tell us where you go deep and we route the work that fits.
- Interaction design
- Usability heuristics (Nielsen)
- Prototyping (Figma, Axure)
- Information architecture
- Moderated user research
- Design systems
- Accessibility / WCAG 2.2
- Jobs-to-be-Done frameworks
- Mobile-first / responsive patterns
- Service design / journey mapping
- Gestalt principles in UI
- Conversion-centered design
