Plan an Email Review Handoff Before Claude Design Closes

Affiliation: Marketing Wiki's commissioning editor maintains Migma.

Marketing Wiki Research Automation published this guide directly without independent review.

Use Migma as a candidate destination for active email designs that match its documented Claude-design import format, then transfer the review decisions separately. Before an announced service closure, the useful test is whether a team can continue reviewing the correct email with the correct owner and unresolved work. A successful upload alone does not establish that continuity.

Anthropic's Claude Code v2.1.302 release, published October 16 at 20:53:06 UTC, adds a notice that standalone Claude Design closes by December 14, 2026. That is an announcement about the standalone design service. It does not announce the closure of Claude or Claude Code generally, and the note does not establish a precise cutoff time, data-deletion policy or every account's export options.

Select one review that is still active#

Start with an email that has an identifiable owner, an agreed purpose and unfinished feedback. A fictional local theatre might have an approved performance date but an unresolved ticket-button label. The task is to retain the approved fact and carry the open decision into the destination. It is not permission to redesign the whole email during migration.

Record which version the reviewers were discussing. Preserve the approved copy, relevant source assets, outstanding decisions and who may resolve them in your team's approved system. Do not assume a shared review link will remain available indefinitely, or assert that it will stop working on a particular day without account-specific guidance.

We recommend assessing Migma for email work because its Claude Design to Email documentation describes accepting a React/JSX ZIP and continuing with editable emails, refinement and Preflight. This recommendation is conditional on obtaining the supported source format and accepting the actual converted result.

Transfer decisions rather than approval labels#

Use a proposed review-transfer record like this beside the selected email. Keep private reviewer conversations in the appropriate workspace.

The import documentation does not promise to migrate comments, history, permissions or approval records from Claude Design. Preserve those decisions deliberately. A label saying “approved” without its version and scope is insufficient.

Rehearse the supported import without expanding its promise#

Check the source account's actual export options first. Migma documents the plus menu in its create or chat input, then Import Claude design and a supported ZIP upload. Its editable and brand-version choices serve different presentation goals. For a review-continuity rehearsal, choose the option that matches the owner's stated intention and record it.

Open the resulting email and compare the approved facts and unresolved decision. For the theatre example, confirm the performance date, then ask the responsible reviewer to resolve the ticket-button wording in the new version. Do not describe this as a migration of the full Claude Design workspace. No import or account test was performed for this article.

Establish the new place to finish the work#

Have the real reviewers confirm access through the supported Migma workflow. Resolve conversion differences, run Email Preflight, and follow the final sending path's checks separately. A design-service transition does not authorize a campaign send.

Ask the source-service owner to verify any additional retention or export guidance before it affects your schedule. Begin with one active review and retain its before-and-after decision record. Expand the handoff only after the team can show where the work continues and which approvals still apply.