# Design Variants — Review & Edit: Substitution Structure

## Variants being tested

### Variant A — Tab
**Description:** A tabbed split. The substitutions screen splits items into tabs ("All", "Will be replaced", "Don't replace", "Ineligible"). Few categories, simple interaction; the active tab shows only its items, with the count on each tab label.
**Key hypothesis:** Fewest navigation steps to find and change a preference; lowest layout shift; counts always visible on tabs.
**Screenshot/Figma link:** [Figma — Tab prototype]

### Variant B — Accordion
**Description:** An accordion of collapsible groups. Each group ("Saved preferences", "Select preferences", "Ineligible items") expands/collapses in place; multiple can be open at once.
**Key hypothesis:** Easier to locate an item because everything is on one scroll; but the layout moves as sections expand and collapse, and counts sit on section headers that scroll away.
**Screenshot/Figma link:** [Figma — Accordion prototype]

### Variant C — Filter
**Description:** A filtered list. A familiar segmented filter at the top filters the full list. The most familiar pattern.
**Key hypothesis:** Familiar, locates items well; but multiplies categories and makes item counts easy to miss when a filter is applied.
**Screenshot/Figma link:** [Figma — Filter prototype]

## What's being compared
- Effort/steps to locate and change one item's preference
- Comprehension of how many items will be replaced (the count)
- Comprehension of which items won't be replaced and which are ineligible
- Confidence and clarity

## Known differences between variants
- **Tab:** items hidden behind tabs; counts live persistently on the tab labels
- **Accordion:** all items reachable by scroll; counts on section headers; layout shifts on expand/collapse
- **Filter:** one list, filtered; counts can disappear or feel ambiguous when a filter is applied