I see where you are coming from, but to play Devil's advocate:
My understanding of Design Thinking is that the entire idea is that the people using a tool know better than the designers. Designers are supposed to interview them and develop a product that better meets their needs. Instead it seems like many designers make something that they think looks cool (e.g. the touch bar and ultra-thinness on Apple laptops) and expect the tool to adapt around it. It seems like in many cases (thin Mac-books, infinite scroll, UI animations) this actually makes the tool less well suited for the person using it.
You can test this directly by asking what piece of user feedback prompted small visual features of the design. If half or more of the design decisions have some kind of backing in experimental data (including interview/qualitative data, that counts too!) you're good. If almost nothing about the design can be directly tied back to experimental data, the designer has gone wrong.
I've worked at several places where the designers made a big show of interviewing/looking at data, but then could not incorporate any aspect of it into their designs. Unsurprisingly, their tools weren't used or appreciated.
